immigration resources Archives - Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq. https://ariasvilla.com/tag/immigration-resources/ Miami Immigration Law Attorney Tue, 10 Feb 2026 22:30:25 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4 https://ariasvilla.com/wp-content/uploads/cropped-cropped-Arias-Villa-Law-Logo-32x32.webp immigration resources Archives - Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq. https://ariasvilla.com/tag/immigration-resources/ 32 32 TPS for Venezuelans After the Court Decision https://ariasvilla.com/tps-for-venezuelans-after-the-court-decision/ https://ariasvilla.com/tps-for-venezuelans-after-the-court-decision/#respond Wed, 04 Feb 2026 18:58:09 +0000 https://ariasvilla.com/?p=11837 The post TPS for Venezuelans After the Court Decision appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..

]]>

What This Means in Real Life and What You Should Do Next

Yesterday, I had the opportunity to speak on Unión Radio Noticias with journalist—and fellow attorney—Eduardo Rodríguez Giolitti, to discuss the current legal landscape for Venezuelans after the most recent federal court decision related to TPS.

During our conversation, I emphasized one key point: even though TPS is not currently in effect as it was before, the litigation surrounding its termination has continued to produce important legal consequences. In practical terms, one of the most meaningful impacts of this decision appears in detention situations, particularly when a person may need to request habeas corpus relief. When someone with TPS history is detained, a decision like this can become a valuable legal tool to challenge detention and protect due process rights.

We also discussed how politics and diplomacy can influence legal strategy. In my view, one realistic possibility—especially considering shifting conditions and diplomatic dynamics—is a form of deferred protection known as “Deferred Action.” Many people remember that something like this was used before TPS was granted in prior years. Deferred Action is typically granted for one year and can allow a person to apply for a work permit. While nothing is guaranteed, it remains a pathway that could be considered at the government level.

If you would like a confidential consultation, you can call my office at (305) 671-0018. You can also follow my updates on social media, where I share information whenever immigration news changes.

Immigration Law Attorney - Martha L. Arias, Esq. - mass deportations

Most importantly, I repeated the same recommendation I have shared before: keep pursuing a lawful immigration status if you are eligible, and do so through proper legal channels—without fraud and without shortcuts that can cause serious consequences later.

As I explained on air, there are very limited groups of people who may still have TPS coverage through October, depending on whether they properly filed and obtained approval during the specified re-registration window. For everyone else, the situation can become legally delicate—especially for those who do not have a pending asylum case—because unlawful presence may begin to accumulate, and that can create future immigration barriers.

If you are Venezuelan and you are unsure of your current status, your expiration dates, or what options may still be available, this is not a moment to guess. It is a moment to get clarity.

Disclaimer: This post is for general informational purposes and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Every case is different and should be evaluated individually.

FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA

SPANISH TRANSCRIPT:

Host:
Martha Arias, siempre colaboradora de este espacio, abogada de inmigración, está de nuevo con nosotros desde Miami, en los Estados Unidos. Bueno, Martha, ayúdanos a entender qué significa esto, en qué cambia el panorama. Buenos días.

Abogada Martha Arias:
Buenos días. Un saludo para usted, Saúl y Eduardo. Muchísimas gracias por invitarme.
A ver, ¿en qué cambia esto el panorama? Yo diría que el mayor impacto —y lo dicen también los legal advisories, o sea, los consejos o las sugerencias que hacen otros abogados, expertos en estos litigios federales— el mejor beneficio de esta decisión es en casos de detención, cuando se vaya a pedir un habeas corpus. ¿Por qué?
Porque sabemos que ya el TPS no existe, pero el litigio continúa. Entonces, si una persona que tiene TPS es detenida, esa persona puede invocar el habeas corpus y este tipo de decisión es el que le va a ayudar o le va a servir para ese caso de detención. Yo diría que este es el mayor impacto que puede tener esta decisión.

Host:
Ahora, doctora, pensando un poquito más allá, ¿cómo puede impactar el tema político en las decisiones del derecho, en este caso TPS? Porque estamos hablando de un estatus de protección. Podríamos hablar también de asilos para venezolanos, pero con esta nueva etapa de relaciones diplomáticas entre Venezuela y Estados Unidos, ¿hacia dónde se podría pensar, incluso en cambios en alguna de las instancias o por lo menos de las figuras legales que se aplican a los venezolanos?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Yo pienso que, en términos políticos, una de las cosas que yo veo posible que le otorguen a los venezolanos en este momento es tal vez un estatus de protección diferida que se llama Deferred Action. No sé si usted se acuerda: en el primer mandato del presidente Trump, el Deferred Action fue concedido por el presidente Trump a los venezolanos antes de que llegara el TPS.
Yo veo este litigio del TPS —que no sé cuándo tenga fin— porque a pesar de esta decisión, a pesar de la decisión de la Corte Suprema, el litigio continúa. Entonces, no sabemos cuándo realmente tenga fin este litigio y si va a ser un éxito para los venezolanos, y podrán tener su TPS antes de octubre de este año, que vamos a decir que se vencerían las extensiones que fueron dadas por el presidente Biden.
Entonces, yo pienso que la acción diferida es viable; es algo que el gobierno puede dar. Dada la situación, los cambios que hay en Venezuela y las relaciones que hay en este momento, no sería imposible que el gobierno de los Estados Unidos otorgara una acción diferida. Normalmente una acción diferida se otorga por un año y le da derecho a la persona a tener un permiso de trabajo.

Host:
Amigo, estamos conversando desde Miami, Estados Unidos, con Martha Arias, abogada de inmigración. Esto da cuenta de la independencia o separación de poderes, o autonomía institucional en los Estados Unidos, porque ¿cómo asociar lo que ha sido la posición de Donald Trump como presidente de los Estados Unidos ante el tema migratorio y esta decisión de una Corte Federal que pareciera, con su decisión, dar una buena noticia a quienes están afectados por no contar con el TPS?

Abogada Martha Arias:
A ver, es un tema muy… a mí me apasiona este tema. Es un tema muy interesante. Es cierto: aquí hay como lo que se llama la revisión o los controles de los poderes públicos, ¿sí? Entonces, el Ejecutivo, el Legislativo y el Judicial, entre ellos se controlan. En este caso, el Judicial está tratando de controlar esas decisiones. El Ejecutivo está, vamos a decir, empujando, peleando, dando la pelea, y pues siguen las cortes tratando de dar una decisión.
Lo que pasa es que hay unos requisitos legales de cómo, cuándo se otorga un TPS y también unos requisitos legales de cómo, cuándo y en qué momento se puede terminar ese TPS.
El TPS de Venezuela… las partes están argumentando por la forma como se terminó: que hubo una transición de un presidente a otro y fue en ese mismo momento cuando las personas ya habían pagado su re-registración, habían hecho toda la documentación necesaria para una re-registración; viene la nueva administración y en menos de 15–20 días lo termina. Esto crea una cierta violación, y allí es donde se están enfocando las partes.
Eso, la decisión del juez Chen —el juez federal de California— lo dijo antes y quedó ratificada ahora por la decisión del 29 de enero de la Corte de Apelaciones. Dijo que la terminación fue ilegal, que la terminación no podía haberse hecho; pero pues precisamente por el procedimiento, la forma como se hizo, es lo que las partes demandantes están alegando como violación a la ley.

Host:
Doctora, en algún momento, cuando conversamos, nos decía la recomendación legal para todos los venezolanos que tienen este estatus o incluso tienen dudas de cuál es su estatus legal: asesórense legalmente, valga la redundancia. Hoy, 3 de febrero, ¿es la misma recomendación? ¿Siente que pudiera haber mayor tranquilidad para los venezolanos? ¿O básicamente sigan buscando su estatus legal, independientemente de lo que pase de la política entre Venezuela y Estados Unidos?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Sí. Yo les aconsejo que sigan tratando, si es posible bajo la ley, buscar un estatus legal. Obviamente, teniendo en cuenta todo lo que son las vías legales, sin cometer fraude, sin hacer cosas indebidas: eso es lo que deben estar haciendo.
Es complicado, es muy complicado, porque si bien el TPS técnicamente ya terminó desde noviembre, son unos pocos, muy pocos, que lo tienen hasta octubre. Los que tienen el TPS de Venezuela hasta octubre son los que sí presentaron su petición de re-registración entre enero 17 del año pasado, 2025, y febrero 15. Los que tienen la re-registración durante ese período y la presentaron, y se las aprobaron: esas personas son las que todavía tienen el TPS hasta octubre de este año. Entonces son muy pocas.
¿Quién entonces es el resto? ¿Qué está haciendo el resto? El resto está fuera de estatus, a no ser que tenga un asilo pendiente. Entonces, mi preocupación con los que no tienen asilo pendiente es que ya están incurriendo en presencia ilegal a partir de noviembre. Técnicamente terminó el TPS y empezaron a incurrir en presencia ilegal, y esto los puede afectar en el futuro.

Host:
Martha, muchísimas gracias siempre por tu disposición y tu aporte. Mucho éxito. Un fuerte abrazo y nos mantenemos en contacto.

Abogada Martha Arias:
Gracias a ustedes. Feliz resto de semana.

Host:
Gracias, doctora. Gracias. Martha Arias, abogada de inmigración, vía Zoom desde Miami, Estados Unidos. Volveremos.

ENGLISH TRANSLATION:

Host:
Martha Arias, always a collaborator of this segment, an immigration attorney, is again with us from Miami, in the United States. Well, Martha, help us understand what this means, how the landscape changes. Good morning.

Attorney Martha Arias, Esq.:
Good morning. Greetings to you, Saúl, and Eduardo. Thank you very much for inviting me.
Let’s see, how does this change the landscape? I would say the greatest impact—and the legal advisories say it too, meaning the advice or the suggestions that other attorneys, experts in these federal litigations, make—the best benefit of this decision is in detention cases when a habeas corpus is going to be requested. Why?
Because we know that TPS no longer exists, but the litigation continues. So, if a person who has TPS is detained, that person can invoke habeas corpus, and this type of decision is what will help them or serve them for that detention case. I would say this is the greatest impact that this decision can have.

Host:
Now, attorney, thinking a little further, how can the political issue impact legal decisions, in this case TPS? Because we are talking about a protection status. We could also talk about asylum for Venezuelans, but with this new stage of diplomatic relations between Venezuela and the United States, in what direction could one think—even changes in some of the instances or at least in the legal figures that apply to Venezuelans?

Attorney Martha Arias, Esq.:
I think that, in political terms, one of the things I see as possible that the current administration could grant to Venezuelans right now is maybe a deferred protection status that is called Deferred Action. I don’t know if you remember: in President Trump’s first term, Deferred Action was granted by President Trump to Venezuelans before TPS arrived.
I see this TPS litigation—which I don’t know when it will end—because despite this decision, despite the Supreme Court decision, the litigation continues. So, we do not know when this litigation will truly end and whether it will be a success for Venezuelans, and whether they will be able to have their TPS before October of this year, which we are going to say is when the extensions given by President Biden would expire.
So, I think deferred action is viable; it is something the government can give. Given the situation, the changes in Venezuela, and the relations that exist at this moment, it would not be impossible for the United States government to grant deferred action. Normally, deferred action is granted for one year and gives the person the right to have a work permit.

Host:
My friend, we are speaking from Miami, United States, with Martha Arias, an immigration attorney. This shows the independence or separation of powers, or institutional autonomy in the United States, because how do we associate what has been Donald Trump’s position as President of the United States on the migration issue and this decision of a Federal Court that seems, with its decision, to give good news to those who are affected by not having TPS?

Attorney Martha Arias, Esq.:
Let’s see, it is a very… this topic fascinates me; it is a very interesting topic. It is true: here there is what is called the review or the checks of the public powers, yes? So, the Executive, the Legislative, and the Judicial, they control each other. In this case, the Judicial is trying to control those decisions. The Executive is, let’s say, pushing, fighting, giving the fight, and so the courts keep trying to give a decision.
What happens is that there are legal requirements for how and when TPS is granted, and also legal requirements for how, when, and at what moment that TPS can be terminated.
Venezuela’s TPS… the parties are arguing about the way it was terminated: that there was a transition from one president to another and it was at that very moment when people had already paid their re-registration, had done all the necessary documentation for a re-registration; the new administration comes in and in less than 15–20 days terminates it. This creates a certain violation, and that is where the parties are focusing.
That, the decision of Judge Chen—the federal judge in California—said it before and it was now ratified by the decision of January 29 by the Court of Appeals. It said the termination was illegal, that the termination could not have been done; but precisely because the procedure, the way it was done, is what the plaintiff parties are alleging as a violation of the law.

Host:
Attorney, at some point when we spoke, you told us the legal recommendation for all Venezuelans who have this status or even have doubts about what their legal status is: get legal advice, to state the obvious. Today, February 3, is it the same recommendation? Do you feel that there could be greater peace of mind for Venezuelans? Or basically, keep seeking their legal status, regardless of what happens politically between Venezuela and the United States?

Attorney Martha Arias, Esq.:
Yes. I advise them to continue trying, if it is possible under the law, to seek a legal status. Obviously, taking into account all legal pathways, without committing fraud, without doing improper things: that is what they should be doing.
It is complicated; it is very complicated, because although TPS technically already ended in November, there are a few, very few, who have it until October. Those who have Venezuela TPS until October are those who did file their re-registration request between January 17 of last year, 2025, and February 15. Those who have the re-registration during that period and filed it, and it was approved: those people are the ones who still have TPS until October of this year. So, they are very few.
So who is the rest? What is the rest doing? The rest is out of status unless they have a pending asylum. So my concern with those who do not have a pending asylum is that they are already accruing unlawful presence starting in November. Technically TPS ended and they began accruing unlawful presence, and this can affect them in the future.

Host:
Martha, thank you very much as always for your willingness and your contribution. Much success. A big hug and we will stay in touch.

Attorney Martha Arias, Esq.:
Thank you all. Have a good rest of the week.

Host:
Thank you, attorney. Thank you. Martha Arias, immigration attorney, via Zoom from Miami, United States. We will be back.

The post TPS for Venezuelans After the Court Decision appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..

]]> https://ariasvilla.com/tps-for-venezuelans-after-the-court-decision/feed/ 0 ICE Raids, Detentions, and Your Rights https://ariasvilla.com/ice-raids-detentions-and-your-rights/ https://ariasvilla.com/ice-raids-detentions-and-your-rights/#respond Wed, 28 Jan 2026 15:45:48 +0000 https://ariasvilla.com/?p=11831 The post ICE Raids, Detentions, and Your Rights appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..

]]>

My Interview with Journalist Orian Brito (January 26, 2026)

This Monday, I joined journalist Orian Brito for an important conversation about the rise in ICE operations being reported in multiple parts of the country, including Florida. I appreciated Orian’s thoughtful approach—because in moments like these, clear information is what helps families avoid unnecessary fear and confusion.

During the interview, we discussed what has been publicly reported about a large enforcement operation in Florida known as “Tidal Wave,” which has been associated with more than 10,000 arrests according to what has been reported in the news. We also discussed reports of increased ICE presence in Central Florida and Orlando beginning around January 20, 2026, including comments publicly attributed to Congressman Maxwell Frost.

I also shared national-level data attributed to the American Immigration Council, including reported increases in ICE detentions and detention capacity trends. While many public conversations focus on individuals with criminal histories, I emphasized that there are also reports indicating a significant increase in detentions of people without criminal offenses, which raises serious concerns for families who are simply trying to live and work while they pursue lawful options.

What happens if someone is detained and has no criminal record?

One of the most important points I made is that every case is different. When someone is detained, the first legal question is often whether that person can request a bond—and whether an immigration judge will be recognized as having jurisdiction to consider that bond request. Factors like how the person entered the United States (with a visa, with parole, or without inspection) can affect the options available.

We also discussed a tool that may be used in certain situations: habeas corpus, a federal court filing that can challenge detention that is unlawful or unreasonably prolonged. Federal litigation is complex, costly, and highly procedural. Even so, in certain detention cases it may be one of the few meaningful pathways to request review.

A serious issue: reports of a DHS memo about home entry

Orian also raised a topic that has concerned many people: reports of a Department of Homeland Security memorandum suggesting that ICE officers could enter residences to make arrests without a federal judge’s warrant, relying on an administrative form (often discussed as an I-205). In the interview, I explained the crucial difference between an administrative document for arrest versus a judge-signed warrant for entering a home. I also shared that, according to what I read, the memo reportedly was not applied in part of Central California due to litigation there.

Know your rights if I.C.E. stops you in public.

Practical guidance for families

If your household is feeling anxious, there are a few responsible steps you can take immediately:

  • Get individualized legal advice. Your options depend on your exact immigration history and prior contacts with immigration authorities.
  • Keep your key documents organized. Make sure trusted family members know where to find them.
  • Have a family plan. Decide who will care for your children, how to access your medical information, and whom to call if a detention occurs.
  • Do not rely on rumors. Seek verified guidance before taking action that could harm your case.

How to contact my office

If you or a loved one needs a confidential consultation, you may contact my office at (305) 671-0018. My website is ariasvilla.com (and marthaarias.com redirects there as well). You may also find updates through my channels, and I appreciate everyone who stays informed and engaged.

Important Disclaimer: This post is for general information only and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Immigration matters are highly fact-specific. For legal advice about your situation, please consult a qualified immigration attorney.

FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA

The post ICE Raids, Detentions, and Your Rights appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..

]]> https://ariasvilla.com/ice-raids-detentions-and-your-rights/feed/ 0 USCIS Announces New EAD Validity Reductions and Enhanced Vetting Measures https://ariasvilla.com/uscis-announces-new-ead-validity-reductions-and-enhanced-vetting-measures/ https://ariasvilla.com/uscis-announces-new-ead-validity-reductions-and-enhanced-vetting-measures/#respond Tue, 09 Dec 2025 17:20:13 +0000 https://ariasvilla.com/?p=11823 The post USCIS Announces New EAD Validity Reductions and Enhanced Vetting Measures appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..

]]>

In recent days, USCIS released an important update to the Policy Manual that will affect many individuals who rely on Employment Authorization Documents (EADs) to work legally in the United States. Because these changes begin to apply immediately to pending and newly filed applications, I want to offer a clear explanation of what was announced, who is impacted, and why these adjustments matter.

According to USCIS, the maximum validity period for certain EAD categories will now be reduced. While many applicants have become accustomed to longer validity periods—particularly the more recent five-year EADs—USCIS has now returned some categories to much shorter terms. The agency states that the goal is to increase the frequency of vetting and strengthen security reviews.

These policy updates also incorporate requirements from recently enacted legislation (H.R. 1 – One Big Beautiful Bill Act), which further limits EAD validity for applicants in Temporary Protected Status (TPS), parole categories, and related classifications.

Which EAD Categories Will Now Be Limited to 18 Months?

Effective for all applications pending or filed on or after December 5, 2025, the maximum validity period for both initial and renewal EADs will be reduced from 5 years back to 18 months for the following groups:

  • Individuals admitted as refugees
  • Individuals granted asylum
  • Individuals granted withholding of deportation or removal
  • Individuals with pending asylum or withholding of removal applications
  • Individuals with pending adjustment of status applications under INA §245
  • Individuals with pending applications for suspension of deportation, cancellation of removal, or NACARA relief

Applicants in these categories should expect a more frequent renewal cycle and should plan accordingly to avoid employment interruptions.

Which Categories Are Now Restricted to One Year of Validity?

Under H.R. 1, which became law on July 4, 2025, and was formally implemented by USCIS through a Federal Register notice on July 22, 2025, the following categories will now receive EADs valid for one year, or until the end of their parole or TPS period—whichever is earlier:

  • Individuals paroled as refugees
  • Individuals granted TPS
  • Individuals granted parole
  • Individuals with a pending TPS application
  • Spouses of entrepreneur parolees

These changes apply to all Form I-765 applications filed or pending on or after July 22, 2025.

Immigration Lawyer Martha L. Arias - Arias Villa Law - U.S. Immigration Legal Documents

Why Is USCIS Making These Changes?

The agency has explained that shorter validity periods allow USCIS to conduct more frequent security screenings. USCIS leadership has emphasized concerns regarding national security and the need to identify potential fraud or individuals who may pose risks.

While these changes do not alter eligibility standards, they do mean that many immigrants—especially those in long-pending categories—will now need to renew their documents far more often than in previous years.

What Should Applicants Do Now?

For anyone who currently holds an EAD or expects to apply soon, several steps are important:

  1. Verify your category. Renewal timelines differ depending on which classification you fall under.
  2. Track expiration dates carefully. With shorter validity periods, timely filing becomes even more critical.
  3. Plan renewal filings early. Avoid waiting until the last minute, as processing times may fluctuate.
  4. Seek trusted legal guidance. These new rules may affect employment stability, parole timelines, and future immigration filings.

If you believe these changes affect your case or you are unsure how to proceed, I encourage you to consult with an immigration attorney who can evaluate your situation individually.

Closing Thoughts

Policy shifts like these can create uncertainty and concern for many families who depend on stable employment authorization. My commitment is to help you stay informed and prepared so that you can continue navigating your immigration journey with confidence and clarity.

For personalized guidance, you may contact my office at 305-671-0018 or make an appointment online. I will continue monitoring updates from USCIS and sharing timely information to keep our community informed.

Disclaimer

This blog post is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Immigration policies change frequently, and the application of the law depends on the specific facts of each case. Reading this post does not create an attorney-client relationship. For advice regarding your situation, please consult a qualified immigration attorney.

The post USCIS Announces New EAD Validity Reductions and Enhanced Vetting Measures appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..

]]> https://ariasvilla.com/uscis-announces-new-ead-validity-reductions-and-enhanced-vetting-measures/feed/ 0 What the New USCIS Suspensions Mean for Asylum Seekers https://ariasvilla.com/what-the-new-uscis-suspensions-mean-for-asylum-seekers/ https://ariasvilla.com/what-the-new-uscis-suspensions-mean-for-asylum-seekers/#respond Wed, 03 Dec 2025 23:51:40 +0000 https://ariasvilla.com/?p=11810 The post What the New USCIS Suspensions Mean for Asylum Seekers appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..

]]>

This morning I joined journalist Lourdes Ubieta on Radio Libre to discuss a development that is generating deep uncertainty among many immigrant communities: the federal government’s announcement that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) will pause the adjudication of immigration applications from nationals of nineteen countries that have also been targeted by a recent presidential proclamation on travel restrictions.

This policy was announced in the wake of a tragic shooting in Washington, D.C., allegedly committed by an Afghan national, and the government has explicitly framed these changes as additional “national security” measures. Its consequences, however, reach far beyond that single event.

What This Means in Practice

Under this new framework, USCIS has instructed officers to pause decisions on many immigration applications— including affirmative asylum cases—that are filed by people from these nineteen countries, while the agency conducts additional background review or “vetting.”

In practical terms, this means:

  • Many cases will remain pending without approval or denial while the additional screening is completed.
  • This can apply even if the applicant already had an interview scheduled or completed. The interview may still be held, but a final decision can be held back until the new review is finished.

Multiple federal, local, and sometimes foreign agencies may become involved in these security checks, which makes it very difficult to predict how long the process will actually take. We know from experience that multi-agency vetting tends to move slowly, and we must be realistic in expecting longer processing times and growing backlogs.

What Happens If Your Asylum Case Is Pending?

If you have a pending affirmative asylum case with USCIS, it is very important to understand one key point:

  • A paused asylum case does not, by itself, make you undocumented.
  • While your asylum application is properly filed and remains pending, you generally do not accrue unlawful presence under existing immigration law, even if your interview or decision is delayed, unless some separate negative event happens in your case.

However, the fact that you may not be accruing unlawful presence does not mean everything else stays the same. The area where most people will feel the impact is work authorization.

Immigration Lawyer Martha L. Arias - Arias Villa Law - U.S. Immigration Legal Documents

Impact on Work Permits (EADs)

The question I am hearing most often is:

“Will I keep my work permit while my asylum remains pending?”

At this time, there is no USCIS policy that guarantees that all asylum applicants from these nineteen countries will keep uninterrupted eligibility for work authorization during prolonged delays. The situation is changing and depends on several overlapping rules:

  1. New 19-Country Policies
    Recent policy guidance indicates that being from one of the nineteen countries can be treated as a negative factor in discretionary decisions, including some immigration benefits. Advocacy organizations monitoring these changes report that USCIS has paused processing of several types of applications from these countries, including asylum, green cards, and in some cases work permits.
  2. End of Broad Automatic EAD Extensions for Many Categories
    Separately, in late October 2025, the Department of Homeland Security issued an interim final rule ending the practice of granting broad automatic extensions of many categories of Employment Authorization Documents (EADs) for people who file renewal applications on or after October 30, 2025.

    • Automatic extensions of up to 540 days continue to apply to eligible renewal applicants who filed before that effective date.
    • For new renewal filings after that date, many workers will no longer receive an automatic extension while their EAD is pending.
  3. Asylum-Based Work Permits Are Discretionary and Case-Specific
    Even before these changes, asylum-based work permits (category C-08) were not automatic. Applicants had to meet the required waiting period and eligibility criteria, and USCIS always retained discretion to grant or deny. With the new national-security-focused policies and the 19-country framework, there is even more uncertainty for applicants whose cases fall under these rules.

In practical terms, this means that some people could experience gaps in work authorization—especially if their EAD renewal is filed after October 30, 2025, or if their case is flagged for additional vetting under the 19-country policies.

That is why I remain especially concerned about asylum seekers who may be forced to wait years for a final asylum decision without clear assurances that their work authorization will be renewed smoothly during that entire period.

We are entering a period in which patience, documentation, and accurate information will be essential. As more official guidance becomes available, I will continue to explain these updates to help the community understand their options and their rights.

If you or a loved one is affected by:

  • The June 4, 2025 Presidential Proclamation imposing new travel restrictions on nationals of 19 countries,
  • The more recent USCIS directives pausing decisions on asylum and other applications from those same countries, or
  • The new rules on work permit extensions,

I strongly encourage you to seek individualized legal advice. These policies are complex, evolving, and heavily dependent on the details of each person’s case.

For information about scheduling a consultation, you may visit my website, follow me on social media, or call my office at (305) 671-0018.

Disclaimer:
This article is intended solely to provide general information on recent immigration developments. It should not be interpreted as legal advice or a substitute for individualized consultation. Immigration regulations, agency policies, and federal directives change rapidly, and their application varies depending on the facts of each case. No attorney–client relationship is formed by accessing this content. Individuals should seek personalized legal counsel before making decisions related to their immigration status, work authorization, or any other matter discussed herein.

WATCH IT ON YOUTUBE

LISTEN ON SPOTIFY

FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA

SPANISH TRANSCRIPT

LOURDES UBIETA:

Bueno, avanzando con los temas, queridos oyentes, el gobierno de Estados Unidos, la administración del presidente Trump anunció ya formalmente lo que nos habían advertido que iba a suceder tras el tiroteo ocurrido en Washington el día antes de Thanksgiving, el jueves de la semana pasada, donde un afgano le disparó a dos guardias nacionales. Bueno, pocas horas después falleció una de ellas, una joven de 20 años. Eso desató, por supuesto, la furia del presidente Trump y de la administración. Y bueno, anunciaban que lo que es el USCIS, la Oficina de Servicios de Ciudadanía e Inmigración, iba a implementar nuevas medidas de seguridad nacional a raíz de este tiroteo, ¿no?

Pero ya es un hecho que todas las solicitudes de inmigración provenientes de diecinueve países considerados de alto riesgo según el Departamento de Seguridad Nacional, citando ese caso de ese tiroteo, pues van a ser suspendidas todas las solicitudes de inmigración. Estamos hablando, amigos oyentes, de países como Afganistán, Myanmar, Chad, la República del Congo, Haití, Irán, Libia, Cuba y Venezuela.

Y esa lista se basa en esta proclamación presidencial de junio que impuso restricciones parciales o totales a la entrada de ciudadanos de estos países, y ahora queda totalmente suspendido. Uno se pregunta: ¿cómo quedan entonces las solicitudes, por ejemplo, de asilo de estas personas que están en los Estados Unidos? De Cuba y de Venezuela puntualmente, ¿no? Porque son los más cercanos que vemos. La doctora Martha Arias está con nosotros a esta hora, abogada de inmigración. Abogada, qué bueno saludarla. Bienvenida a su casa, Radio Libre.

ABOGADA MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:

Muchísimas gracias, Lourdes. Un placer para mí estar con usted. También un saludo para todos y gracias por invitarme de nuevo a su programa.

LOURDES UBIETA:

Yo feliz de tenerla por aquí, doctora, para que nos ayude a entender qué va a pasar ahora. Porque en el documento se especifica que quienes se ajusten a esos criterios que estábamos mencionando deberán someterse a un proceso de revisión exhaustivo que puede incluir una entrevista o una nueva entrevista para evaluar todas las amenazas contra la seguridad nacional y la seguridad pública. ¿Cómo le parece y cómo va a operar esto, doctora?

ABOGADA MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:

Esta es una de esas situaciones donde teóricamente todos estaríamos de acuerdo con un procedimiento de revisión de antecedentes penales de las personas, ¿cierto? O sea, yo pienso que como ciudadanos de los Estados Unidos, habitantes de esta comunidad, queremos que el gobierno sepa y nos ayude con esa seguridad de vigilar quién entra a nuestro país y quién está aplicando para asilo, para que no vaya a ser un terrorista o una persona de cualquier organización delictiva. Obviamente que todos queremos eso, ¿cierto? O sea, teóricamente es algo que creo que todos los ciudadanos quisieran.

En la práctica, me parece a mí que lo difícil es la aplicación de esto. Porque, como usted bien lo dijo, Lourdes, se van a paralizar o pausar la toma de decisiones de todos esos casos de asilo, particularmente los que entraron en los últimos años, y sobre todo los que entraron por la frontera sin inspección o los que entraron con parole y pertenezcan a alguno de estos 19 países.

Entonces, ¿qué quiere decir pausar la toma de decisiones? Que no van ni a aprobar ni a negar ninguno de estos casos hasta que no se haga una revisión de ellos. Obviamente son casos que o ya tuvieron entrevista, o están a punto, o van a tener entrevista, y después de la entrevista pues no va a pasar nada. Las entrevistas se van a seguir dando; o sea, al que no haya tenido entrevista le van a dar entrevista. El punto es que no se va a tomar ninguna decisión hasta que no le revisen exhaustivamente esos récords penales a las personas.

Entonces la pregunta siguiente es: ¿cuánto va a tardar esto? No sabemos. Usted sabe que todo lo que viene del gobierno puede tomar un poquito más de tiempo. Sobre todo cuando hay varias agencias envueltas en esto, pues seguramente tendremos al FBI, algunas otras agencias locales de policía, también tal vez agencias extranjeras de otros países que tengan que ver con los antecedentes penales de las personas de esos países. Obviamente me imagino que lo harán a través del Departamento de Estado, que son los que manejan los consulados, ¿no?

No me imagino que, por ejemplo, para una persona que viene de Venezuela, el Departamento de Estado notificará al consulado que le corresponde ahora (el consulado de Estados Unidos en Colombia) que averigüe los antecedentes penales de esa persona en Venezuela o en cualquier otro país. Y eso puede tomar tiempo. Como digo, usted sabe, la burocracia es mucha y el gobierno trabaja de pronto un poquito menos rápido que el sector privado. Entonces pienso que esto puede crear una tardanza. ¿Cuánto? Pues no sabemos. Ese es el interrogante para todos: ¿cuánto va a demorar este vetting, que es como lo llama el gobierno —la revisión de antecedentes—? Eso es lo que no sabemos.

Entonces, vuelvo y repito: en términos teóricos es una medida buena que todos queremos, pero en términos prácticos no sé si se nos va a salir de las manos o cuánto tiempo va a tardar. Como dice el cuento: amanecerá y veremos. Nos vamos a quedar sentados.

LOURDES UBIETA:

Básicamente aquí lo que está pasando entonces, doctora, es que ahora al gobierno federal y al Departamento de Ciudadanía e Inmigración le toca hacer lo que no se hizo durante la administración de Biden con estos inmigrantes que entraron ilegalmente a los Estados Unidos sin el proceso de verificación de datos: quién es esta persona, de dónde viene, cuál es su origen… es decir, tener que hacer un proceso que ha debido hacerse antes de que llegaran a los Estados Unidos. ¿Correcto?

ABOGADA MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:

Eh… es correcto, pero yo no diría que solamente fue algo que ocurrió en la administración de Biden, porque en la administración de Biden sí hubo una entrada de personas —vamos a decir— desbordante por esa frontera, que obviamente nadie quiso eso, nadie lo quiere tampoco. Pero antes de Biden la gente ha entrado por la frontera de los Estados Unidos y México, y hasta ahora entran muchos por la de Canadá, de la misma forma. O sea, que esto no es la primera vez que nosotros tenemos inmigrantes que entran por la frontera y que nunca han sido revisados sus antecedentes.

LOURDES UBIETA:

Por supuesto. Lo que pasa es que los últimos casos han sido precisamente personas que entraron, por ejemplo, el caso del afgano que mató a las dos guardias nacionales, que fueron producto de esa situación que se presentó caótica con la salida de los Estados Unidos de Afganistán —que no es que no salieran, sino cómo salieron— y las consecuencias que eso ha traído. Puntualmente en este caso me refiero a este afgano.

Ahora, yo me pregunto: ¿cómo quedan las solicitudes de asilo? Por ejemplo, las peticiones de asilo que están en curso, porque eso es algo que entiendo está preocupando mucho a la comunidad, en el caso de los cubanos, por ejemplo.

ABOGADA MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:

Esas peticiones de asilo, por lo menos lo que son asilos afirmativos —que son los que están con USCIS, con Citizenship and Immigration Services— esos asilos van a quedar pausados. No hay decisión.

Los que están con la Corte de Inmigración, que ya es otra agencia, se llama EOIR —Executive Office for Immigration Review— esos, que se llaman asilos defensivos porque están en una corte defendiéndose de una deportación, esos van a continuar.

El mayor problema que tenemos ahora son esos que quedan pausados.

LOURDES UBIETA:

…quiere decir que quedan ilegales. No, no es que quedan ilegales, sencillamente está pausado el proceso. Pero pueden seguir haciendo su vida dentro de Estados Unidos.

ABOGADA MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:

Sí, pero ahí viene el punto que quería tocar. Vamos un paso adelante: no van a quedar ilegales porque el asilo está pendiente. Mientras el asilo esté pendiente, están protegidos de acumular presencia ilegal; o sea, no van a tener presencia ilegal en los Estados Unidos.

Pero ahora vamos al punto del permiso de trabajo. ¿Van a tener permiso de trabajo?

Y eso es lo que más me preocupa, Lourdes, porque no hay claridad —o por lo menos yo no la he visto— y no tengo ningún documento oficial que yo pueda usar para decirle a un cliente: “Sí, señor, usted va a tener su permiso de trabajo mientras su asilo continúe pendiente.” No. No tengo ese documento.

Lo que tengo son, por ejemplo, informaciones del gobierno que ha dicho que ya no va a haber prórrogas automáticas de los permisos de trabajo de personas que tienen asilo pendiente. Acuérdense que había una prórroga automática donde a la persona se le extendía automáticamente por 180 días, creo que era, después de que aplicaba para la renovación. Ya no hay prórrogas automáticas, uno.

Dos: otra comunicación —un policy alert, una alerta de política del gobierno— donde explicaron que ahora todo el mundo que tenga un asilo pendiente no va a tener derecho al permiso de trabajo solo porque tiene el asilo pendiente. Que van a hacer una revisión y a determinar a quiénes, caso por caso, les van a dar derecho a ese permiso de trabajo.

Eso es lo que tenemos oficialmente.

¿Qué quiere decir?

Que quién sabe si todos esos que van a tener ese asilo pendiente por quién sabe cuánto tiempo, quién sabe si van a tener ese permiso de trabajo.

Esa es mi mayor preocupación, Lourdes, porque es que la gente que está pendiente de un asilo, lo que más le interesa —probablemente, según lo que yo escucho— es obtener ese permiso de trabajo. ¿Por qué? Porque les permite seguir trabajando y asegurando su sustento. Pero si no lo tienen, y se tienen que esperar tres, cuatro, cinco, diez años sin permiso de trabajo, ahí es donde está la situación preocupante.

LOURDES UBIETA:

Por supuesto. Estamos conversando con la abogada de inmigración Martha Arias. Así lo veo yo también, ¿no? Porque en ese proceso… además son miles de solicitudes, cientos de miles de solicitudes. No cien ni doscientos. Es decir, humanamente, ¿cuántas personas hacen falta en esta oficina para atender y revisar exhaustivamente y hacer entrevistas exhaustivas de cada una de estas personas a las que su proceso de asilo queda suspendido temporalmente?

Imaginen ustedes… esto puede tardar años, doctora Martha. Años.

Y mientras tanto, la gente tiene que comer, tiene que pagar la luz, tiene que pagar el agua, tienen que vivir.

ABOGADA MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:

No… aquí en la Florida el agua y la luz… y si eso va para arriba, va para arriba. Así es. No, aquí sí vamos a tener que afinar todo, decir: “Venga un momentico, bájele a la burocracia local, bájele a todo eso para poder pagar”, porque mire… nada más estaba viendo estos días que la recolección de basura ya no son quinientos y pico… serán trescientos y pico…

LOURDES UBIETA:

Y la electricidad también para el año que viene… Así es. Martha Arias, abogada de inmigración, gracias por acompañarme.

ABOGADA MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:

Gracias. Un gran abrazo para usted.

ENGLISH TRANSLATION

 

LOURDES UBIETA:
Well, moving forward with the topics, dear listeners, the United States government, the administration of President Trump has already formally announced what they had warned us was going to happen after the shooting that occurred in Washington the day before Thanksgiving, last week’s Thursday, where an Afghan shot two National Guard members. Well, a few hours later one of them died, a young 20-year-old woman. That unleashed, of course, the fury of President Trump and of the administration. And well, they were announcing that what is USCIS, the Office of Citizenship and Immigration Services, was going to implement new national security measures. Because of this shooting, right?

But it is now a fact that all immigration applications coming from nineteen countries considered high-risk according to the Department of Homeland Security, citing that case of that shooting, well, all immigration applications are going to be suspended. We are talking, dear listeners, about countries such as Afghanistan, Myanmar, Chad, the Republic of the Congo, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Cuba, and Venezuela.

And that list is based on this presidential proclamation from June that imposed partial or total restrictions on the entry of citizens from these countries, and now it is completely suspended. One wonders: how do the applications, for example, of asylum of these people who are in the United States end up? From Cuba and Venezuela specifically, right? Because they are the ones we see closer. Attorney Martha Arias is with us at this hour, immigration attorney. Attorney, how good to greet you. Welcome to your home, Radio Libre.

ATTORNEY MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
Thank you very much, Lourdes. A pleasure for me to be with you. Also greetings to everyone and thank you for inviting me once again to your program.

LOURDES UBIETA:
I am happy to have you here, attorney, so that you can help us understand what is going to happen now. Because in the document it specifies that those who fall under those criteria that we were mentioning will have to undergo an exhaustive review process that may include an interview or a new interview to evaluate all threats against national security and public safety. How does it seem to you and how is this going to operate, attorney?

ATTORNEY MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
This is—this is one of those situations where theoretically we would all agree with a procedure of review of the criminal background of people, right? I mean, I think that as citizens of the United States, inhabitants of this community, we want the government to know and help us with that security of monitoring who enters our country and who is applying for asylum, so that the person is not a terrorist, a person from any criminal organization. Obviously, we all want that, right? I mean, theoretically, it is something that I think all citizens would want.

In practical terms, it seems to me that the difficult thing is the application of this in practical form, because as you correctly said, Lourdes, the decision-making on all of those asylum cases is going to be paralyzed or paused, particularly those who entered in recent years and those who entered especially through the border without inspection or those who entered with parole, right, and who belong to one of these 19 countries or belong, well, to any of these countries.

So, what does pausing the decision-making mean? That they are not going to approve nor deny any of these cases until a review of them is done. Obviously, these are cases that either already had an interview or are about to or are going to have an interview, and after the interview nothing is going to happen. The interviews will continue being given; that is, the one who has not had an interview will be given an interview. The point is that no decision is going to be made until their criminal records are reviewed exhaustively.

So the next question is: how long is this going to take? We do not know. You know that everything that, especially what comes from the government, can take a little more time. Especially when there are several agencies involved in this; surely we would have the FBI, some other local police agencies, also maybe foreign agencies of other countries that have to do with the police or criminal background of the people from those countries. Obviously, I imagine they will do it through the Department of State, which is the one that manages the consulates, right?

I do not imagine that, for example, for a person who comes from Venezuela, the Department of State, well, will notify the consulate that corresponds now—that is the U.S. consulate in Colombia—to investigate the criminal records of that person in Venezuela or in any other country. And that can take time, as I say. You know, the bureaucracy is a lot and the government works maybe a little less fast, I would say, than the private sector. So I think this can create a delay. How much? Well, we do not know. That is the question for everyone. How long this vetting—which is how the government calls it, the review of background—how long is that going to take? That is what we do not know.

So, I repeat again: in theoretical terms it is a good measure that we all want, I mean in theoretical terms, but in practical terms I think that I do not know if this is going to get out of our hands or how long. Here, as the saying goes, well, dawn will tell. We will stay seated.

LOURDES UBIETA:
Basically what is happening here then, attorney, is that now the federal government and the Department of Citizenship and Immigration have to do what was not done during the Biden administration with these immigrants who entered illegally into the United States without the process of data verification, of who is this person who is entering the country, what is coming, what is it, where does it come from, what is its origin… That is, having to do a process that should have been done before they arrived in the United States, correct?

ATTORNEY MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
Eh… that is correct, but I would not say that it was only something that occurred in the Biden administration, because the Biden administration did have an entry of people, let’s say, overflowing through that border. Which, obviously, nobody wanted that; nobody wants that either. But before Biden, people have entered through the border of the United States and Mexico, and even now many enter through the one with Canada, in the same way. So this is not the first time that we have immigrants who enter through the border and whose backgrounds have never been reviewed.

LOURDES UBIETA:
Of course. What happens is that the latest cases have been precisely people who entered—for example, the case of the Afghan who killed the two National Guard members—that were the product of that chaotic situation with the departure of the United States from Afghanistan, which is not that they should not have left, but how they left, and the consequences that this has brought. Specifically in this case I refer to this Afghan.

Now, I wonder how the asylum applications end up, for example the asylum petitions that are underway, because that is something that I understand is worrying the community a lot, in the case of Cubans, for example.

ATTORNEY MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
Those asylum petitions, at least what are affirmative asylums—which are those that are with USCIS, with Citizenship and Immigration Services—those asylums are going to be paused. There is no decision.

Those that are with the Immigration Court, which is already another agency, is called EOIR—Executive Office for Immigration Review—those that are called defensive asylums because they are in a court defending themselves from a deportation, those are going to continue.

The biggest problem that we have now are those that remain paused.

LOURDES UBIETA:
…you mean they remain illegal? No, it is not that they remain illegal, it is simply that the process is paused. They can continue doing their life within the United States.

ATTORNEY MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
Yes, but there comes the point I wanted to touch. There comes—we are going one step forward. They are not going to remain illegal because the asylum is pending. As long as the asylum is pending, they are protected from accumulating unlawful presence. Or rather, they are not going to have unlawful presence in the United States.

But now we go to the point of the work permit. Are they going to have a work permit?
And that is what worries me the most, Lourdes, because there is no clarity—or at least I have not seen it—and I do not have any official document that I can use to tell a client: “Yes, sir, you are going to have your work permit while your asylum continues pending.” No. I do not have that document.

What I do have are, for example, government communications that have said that there will no longer be automatic extensions of work permits for people who have pending asylum. Remember that there used to be an automatic extension where the person would have it automatically extended for 180 days, I think it was, after applying for the renewal. There are no longer automatic extensions, number one.

Number two: another communication—a policy alert, a political alert from the government—where they explained that now everyone who has a pending asylum is not going to have the right to a work permit just because they have the pending asylum. That they are going to do a review and determine who, case by case, is going to have the right to that work permit.

That is what we have officially.

What does that mean?
That who knows if all those who are going to have that pending asylum for who knows how long—who knows if they are going to have that work permit.

That is my biggest concern, Lourdes, because people who are waiting for an asylum, what interests them the most—probably, according to what I hear—is to have that work permit. Why? Because it allows them to continue working and earning their living. But if they do not have it, and they have to wait three, four, five, ten years without a work permit, that is where the concerning situation is.

LOURDES UBIETA:
Of course. We are speaking with immigration attorney Martha Arias. That is how I see it too, right? Because in that process… because it is also thousands of applications, hundreds of thousands of applications. Not one hundred nor two hundred. I mean, humanly, how many people are needed in this office to attend to and review exhaustively and do exhaustive interviews for each one of these people whose asylum process is temporarily suspended?

Imagine that… it can take years, attorney Martha. Years. And meanwhile, people have to eat, have to pay electricity, have to pay water, they have to live.

ATTORNEY MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
No… here in Florida the water and electricity… And if that goes up, it goes up. That’s right. No, here we are going to have to refine everything, to say: “Come here for a moment, lower the local bureaucracy, lower all of that so we can pay,” because look… I was just seeing the other day that the garbage collection is no longer five-hundred-and-some… it will be three-hundred-and-some…

LOURDES UBIETA:
And electricity too for next year… That’s right. Martha Arias, immigration attorney, thank you for joining me.

ATTORNEY MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
Thank you. A big hug for you.

The post What the New USCIS Suspensions Mean for Asylum Seekers appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..

]]> https://ariasvilla.com/what-the-new-uscis-suspensions-mean-for-asylum-seekers/feed/ 0 Immigration Alert: New U.S. Entry Restrictions What Applicants Must Know? https://ariasvilla.com/immigration-alert-new-u-s-entry-restrictions-what-applicants-must-know/ https://ariasvilla.com/immigration-alert-new-u-s-entry-restrictions-what-applicants-must-know/#respond Tue, 02 Dec 2025 16:07:47 +0000 https://ariasvilla.com/?p=11803 The post Immigration Alert: New U.S. Entry Restrictions What Applicants Must Know? appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..

]]>

The landscape of U.S. immigration changed significantly on June 4, 2025, with the issuance of a Presidential Proclamation that imposes sweeping entry restrictions on nationals from 19 countries. As an immigration law attorney practicing in this complex field, it is crucial to understand the foundation and scope of these new rules, which revive country-specific restrictions targeting deficiencies in governmental cooperation and perceived security risks.

The stated policy objective is clear: to protect United States citizens from foreign nationals who may intend to commit terrorist attacks, threaten national security, espouse hateful ideology, or otherwise exploit U.S. immigration laws for malevolent purposes.

The Legal Foundation and Rationale for the Restrictions

These measures are imposed under the authority of sections 212(f) and 215(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). The administration asserts that these steps are necessary because the U.S. Government lacks sufficient information to assess the risks posed by foreign nationals from the designated countries.

A critical component of the Proclamation is the directive for the United States to encourage foreign governments to improve their information-sharing and identity-management protocols and practices.

The restrictions are based on a joint report submitted by the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director of National Intelligence. This assessment considered several factors when determining which countries warranted suspension:

  1. Screening and Vetting Capabilities.
  2. Information Sharing Policies.
  3. Country-Specific Risk Factors, including a significant terrorist presence.
  4. Visa-Overstay Rate.
  5. Cooperation with Accepting Back Removable Nationals.

The Proclamation specifically notes that immigrants (who become Lawful Permanent Residents) are more difficult to remove, increasing the dangers associated with errors when their home countries maintain inadequate identity-management or information-sharing policies.

The Two Tiers of Entry Suspension

The restrictions distinguish between two categories of countries, applying limitations to both immigrant and nonimmigrant entry.

Tier 1: Full Suspension of Entry (12 Countries)

Nationals of the following 12 countries face a full suspension of entry into the United States as both immigrants and nonimmigrants.

COUNTRY Primary Rationale/Deficiency Cited in the Proclamation
Afghanistan Controlled by the Taliban (SDGT group); lacks competent central authority and appropriate screening measures; high F/M/J overstay rate (29.30% in FY 2023).
Burma High B-1/B-2 overstay rate (27.07%); historically failed to accept removable nationals.
Chad Unacceptable and high visa overstay rate (49.54% for B-1/B-2, 55.64% for F/M/J in FY 2023), indicating a "blatant disregard for United States immigration laws".
Republic of the Congo High overstay rates (29.63% B-1/B-2).
Equatorial Guinea Extremely high F/M/J visa overstay rate (70.18%).
Eritrea Questionable competence of central authority; criminal records unavailable to the U.S.; historically refuses to accept removable nationals.
Haiti High overstay rates; lacks a central authority with sufficient law enforcement information; references the influx of "hundreds of thousands of illegal Haitian aliens" during the previous administration.
Iran State sponsor of terrorism; fails to cooperate in identifying security risks; historically fails to accept removable nationals.
Libya No competent or cooperative central authority for documents; historical terrorist presence.
Somalia Government lacks command and control of its territory; lacks competent central authority; identified as a terrorist safe haven; historically refuses to accept removable nationals.
Sudan Lacks competent central authority and appropriate screening/vetting measures.
Yemen Lacks competent central authority and appropriate screening/vetting measures; government lacks physical control over its territory.

Tier 2: Partial Suspension of Entry (7 Countries)

For the following seven countries, the entry of nationals as immigrants is suspended, and the entry of nationals as nonimmigrants is suspended specifically for B-1, B-2, B-1/B-2, F, M, and J visas.

Furthermore, consular officers are directed to reduce the validity for any other nonimmigrant visa issued to nationals of these partially restricted countries (such as H or L visas), to the extent permitted by law.

The partially restricted countries are: Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan, and Venezuela. (Note that Cuba is also identified as a state sponsor of terrorism and fails to share sufficient law enforcement information).

Practical Application: Who is Affected and When?

The Proclamation is effective as of June 9, 2025, at 12:01 am eastern daylight time.

Crucially, the suspensions apply only to foreign nationals of the designated countries who are:

  1. Outside the United States on the effective date.
  2. Do not have a valid visa on the effective date.

This means that no immigrant or nonimmigrant visa issued before the applicable effective date shall be revoked pursuant solely to this proclamation. If a client holds a valid visa, they are generally protected from having that specific visa canceled under these new rules.

Navigating Exceptions and Waivers

For those advising clients from these 19 countries, the exceptions offer the best path forward. The restrictions do not apply to several key groups:

  • Lawful Permanent Residents (LPRs) of the United States.
  • Dual nationals traveling on a passport issued by a non-designated country.
  • Immediate Family Immigrant Visas (IR-1/CR-1, IR-2/CR-2, IR-5), provided there is clear and convincing evidence of identity and family relationship (e.g., DNA).
  • Adoptions (IR-3, IR-4, IH-3, IH-4).
  • Afghan Special Immigrant Visas.
  • Immigrant visas for ethnic and religious minorities facing persecution in Iran.
  • Specific official/international organization visas (A-1, A-2, C-2, C-3, G-1, G-2, G-3, G-4, NATO categories).

Beyond these blanket exceptions, the Proclamation establishes mechanisms for discretionary, case-by-case waivers:

  • The Secretary of State may grant an exception if the individual’s travel would serve a United States national interest.
  • The Attorney General may grant an exception if the travel would advance a critical United States national interest involving the Department of Justice, such as the presence of witnesses in criminal proceedings.

Finally, it is paramount to remember that these restrictions do not limit the ability of an individual to seek asylum, refugee status, withholding of removal, or protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT), consistent with U.S. laws.

This Proclamation reinforces that geopolitical factors and immigration compliance—specifically visa overstay rates—are now critical components of U.S. entry determinations. Clients from these 19 nations must anticipate significantly increased scrutiny and should explore all available statutory and discretionary exceptions before attempting to apply for a new visa.

DISCLAIMER: This article offers an interpretation and detailed commentary on the Presidential Proclamation of June 4, 2025, from an experienced immigration law perspective. This content is strictly for informational purposes only and should not be construed as formal legal advice. It does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Due to the complexity of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) and these specific restrictions, all individuals should consult with qualified legal counsel regarding their unique circumstances. Please note that the Proclamation itself states that it is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable by law or in equity by any party against the United States

The post Immigration Alert: New U.S. Entry Restrictions What Applicants Must Know? appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..

]]> https://ariasvilla.com/immigration-alert-new-u-s-entry-restrictions-what-applicants-must-know/feed/ 0 Understanding the Latest TPS Developments https://ariasvilla.com/understanding-the-latest-tps-developments/ https://ariasvilla.com/understanding-the-latest-tps-developments/#respond Wed, 19 Nov 2025 13:19:28 +0000 https://ariasvilla.com/?p=11794 The post Understanding the Latest TPS Developments appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..

]]>

Last Thursday, I joined journalist Orian Brito to discuss an issue that continues to touch thousands of Venezuelan families in the United States: the end of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) and the new legal actions that emerged after November 7. I appreciate every opportunity to help our community understand what these changes truly mean, especially during moments of uncertainty.

During the interview, we talked about the document submitted by more than 125 Democratic legislators to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Although this filing has received significant attention, it is important to approach it with clarity and realism. Legally, it is an amicus brief, a supporting document that expresses political and humanitarian concern, but it does not have the power to reverse the termination of TPS on its own. At this stage, the decision ending TPS remains fully in effect.

For many Venezuelans, especially those who relied solely on TPS and did not have another pending immigration process, this creates a difficult reality. Individuals without asylum applications, family petitions, or another form of relief are now without legal status as of November 7. This change carries serious consequences, including the accumulation of unlawful presence.

I also addressed the confusion surrounding the $100 asylum filing fee. USCIS has now clarified publicly that individuals with pending asylum cases do not need to pay this fee, even if a payment notice was previously issued. That clarification, however, came a few days after the court’s order, and many people understandably felt lost in the process.

We ended our conversation by discussing labor certification cases, travel permits, and the complexities created when TPS, asylum, and employment-based processes intersect. These situations must be evaluated carefully, because each case has its own risks, timelines, and legal implications. For some, a viable path may exist. For others, certain steps—like international travel—can jeopardize everything.

My goal is to keep our community informed with honesty and compassion. These are not easy times, but staying vigilant, asking questions, and seeking reliable legal guidance can make a meaningful difference. I thank Orian for opening this space for clarity and for the respect he always shows toward the immigrant community.

If you need guidance about TPS, asylum, family petitions, labor certification, or your specific situation, you are welcome to contact my office at 305-671-0018. We will continue sharing updates as soon as new information becomes available.

Disclaimer:
The information provided in this article is for general educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Immigration laws and policies change frequently, and the details of each case are unique. Reading this material does not create an attorney-client relationship with my office. If you need guidance about your personal situation, please schedule a consultation so we can review your case individually.

FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA

SPANISH TRANSCRIPT:

Orian Brito:
Hola amigos, feliz jueves. Un abrazo para todos ustedes. Gracias por conectarse, por ser parte de esta comunidad. Hay varias informaciones. Una tiene que ver con inmigración, otra tiene que ver con Venezuela, que aunque no es de inmigración propiamente, lo voy a decir porque está en desarrollo. Pero escuchen esto.

Surge un nuevo intento por parte de congresistas de Estados Unidos para revertir la decisión que puso fin al TPS para los venezolanos. Hoy sabemos que más de 125 legisladores demócratas presentaron un documento ante la Corte de Apelaciones del Noveno Circuito el día de hoy para que se anule la medida que terminó con este beneficio migratorio, incluso después de que la Corte Suprema, como ustedes saben, respaldara al Gobierno para poner fin al TPS.

¿Qué impacto real puede tener esta acción? ¿Podría significar una nueva esperanza para los venezolanos que perdieron su TPS? Hoy converso con una abogada muy querida, una mujer muy profesional que siempre me da su tiempo para hablar del tema: es la abogada de inmigración Martha Arias, que nos va a ayudar a entender el alcance legal de esta decisión.

Abogada, ¿cómo está?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Buenas tardes, o buenos días, o… o noche ya. Ya es la noche, más bien.

Orian Brito:
¿Cómo le va?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Muchas gracias por su invitación. Es un placer para mí estar con ustedes y con su audiencia. Estoy bien, bien, con mucho trabajo, muchas cosas que hacer, pero para eso estamos, con salud.

Orian Brito:
Es que es lo más importante, abogada. Quiero preguntarle: ¿qué implica esta acción de los legisladores? Se conoce hoy, 12 de noviembre, pero bueno, ya el TPS el 7 de noviembre prácticamente podemos decir que finalizó. ¿Qué impacto podría tener esta decisión en el Noveno Circuito?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Yo sinceramente creo que no va a tener ningún impacto desde el punto de vista legal. Lo que estos 120 congresistas presentaron —incluyendo una senadora demócrata de la Florida, Debbie Wasserman Schultz— es lo que se llama en inglés un “amicus brief”.

Un “amicus brief” es como un memorial de alegatos que se conoce como amigo de la corte. Es decir, este grupo de congresistas presenta este documento a la corte pidiendo que se reconsidere esa decisión de terminar el TPS de Venezuela.

Ellos aducen, dentro de este memorial de alegatos o dentro de este “amicus brief”, lo siguiente:

  • Que la ley no le otorga al Ejecutivo —en este caso al Departamento de Homeland Security— la libertad de tomar la decisión de terminar el TPS por razones políticas.
  • Que la ley le da la libertad de hacerlo por razones humanitarias, pero no políticas.

Entonces consideran estos senadores que, al terminar el Ejecutivo el TPS y los argumentos que presentó, es como que volvieron a escribir la ley —“rewrite the law”—, quiere decir, como que la interpretaron a su manera, pero que el Congreso no tuvo la intención de interpretar la ley de esta forma para ser aplicada al TPS.

En otras palabras, como quien dice que los senadores están diciendo: “Nosotros, el Congreso, interpretamos la ley del TPS de una forma distinta a la que la está interpretando el Ejecutivo, y por lo tanto no debe terminarse este TPS”.

Pero fíjese: esto es un “amicus brief” que se está presentando apenas ahora, cuando ya esta decisión está en firme. Claro, hay ciertas peticiones que se presentan post–decision. Eso es lo que se llama post-decision petitions, peticiones que se presentan después de que hay una decisión. Obviamente, legalmente se pueden hacer, pero bueno…

No sé qué impacto legal tenga. Pienso que tiene más un soporte, un reconocimiento político de los demócratas al pueblo venezolano y al TPS, como un gesto, como un: “Vamos a actuar en beneficio de estos venezolanos”.

Pero pienso yo que es tarde, uno. Y dos: que de pronto esta medida no va a ser tan fuerte, por lo menos en esta etapa, porque no lo hicieron antes… porque no pasó antes… porque no estuvieron antes. Eso es lo que…

Orian Brito:
Por cierto, sobre la tensión en Venezuela, quiero aprovechar este momento —que era lo que iba a decir, que no tiene que ver con inmigración— pero usted sabe que hemos visto un despliegue de Estados Unidos en el Caribe. Hay una tensión entre Estados Unidos y Venezuela. Estados Unidos ha atacado unas narco–lanchas y, solamente a manera de información, hoy lo acaba de informar hace instantes el Secretario de Guerra.

Dice que el presidente Trump —lo voy a leer textual— ordenó actuar, y el Departamento de Guerra está cumpliendo. “Hoy anuncio”, dice, “el operativo Lanza del Sur, dirigido por las Fuerzas de Tarea Conjunta del Comando Sur. Esta misión defiende nuestra nación, elimina a los narcoterroristas de nuestro hemisferio y protege a nuestro país de las drogas que están matando a nuestra gente. El hemisferio occidental es el vecindario de América y lo vamos a proteger.”

Es el anuncio. Anuncian a partir de hoy esta operación Lanza del Sur. ¿Cuál es el alcance? ¿A dónde va o cómo va? No lo podemos decir. Yo no soy astrólogo, ni tampoco experto militar, pero ya la operación tiene un nombre, un objetivo: erradicar el narcoterrorismo.

Así que vamos a estar pendientes con lo que ocurra en las próximas horas.

Fíjese que… quiero preguntarle a la abogada: mientras los venezolanos siguen en esta diatriba, ¿qué hacer? Lo recomendable, en todo caso, sería no esperar qué pueda decidir el Noveno Circuito de Apelaciones, sino buscar otra vía, como se ha hablado anteriormente.

Porque esto… primero, ya estamos a 12 de noviembre, ya se acerca una fecha donde Estados Unidos —o todo el mundo— empieza a salir de vacaciones, etcétera. No tenemos, digamos, una fecha tentativa en la que se podría decidir esto.

Abogada Martha Arias:
Es correcto. No tenemos una fecha tentativa. Y posiblemente —o sea rápido o sea para el año entrante— pero los venezolanos definitivamente…

Hay unos que pueden tener todavía un estatus legal a través del asilo que tengan pendiente, si es que tienen un asilo pendiente.
Otros, pues, que tienen el beneficio de una petición familiar —sea de cónyuge, o de padres, o de hijos— pues también van a tener ese privilegio.

Pero está el gran número de venezolanos que solamente estaban protegidos por el TPS, que no presentaron asilo, y que definitivamente, en este momento —en noviembre 13— están totalmente desprotegidos y sin un estatus legal.

Entonces, la decisión tendría que venir muy rápido para ser positiva para ese grupo de venezolanos que están totalmente desprotegidos. Yo espero que una decisión venga del Congreso, pero directamente del Congreso, no a través de las cortes, porque estos litigios —usted sabe— van y vienen, van y vienen.

Si alguna parte ganara aquí, seguramente el Gobierno va a volver a apelar, y vuelve y apela, y volvemos a este círculo vicioso.

Orian Brito:
Pero es que es un círculo que termina en lo mismo, donde la Corte Suprema le dice al Gobierno: “Usted tiene derecho de quitarlo”, y entonces la gente se queda en el aire.
Yo, siendo venezolano, y trato de brindar servicio a través de este espacio, condeno —y lo digo públicamente— que se brinde una esperanza que siento que es una esperanza delicada. Es decir, que no brinda solidez a la gente.

Sí, vamos a ir al Noveno Circuito… y la gente se sienta y espera al Noveno Circuito.
No. Usted está acumulando, si usted no tiene ningún otro trámite, está acumulando presencia ilegal en Estados Unidos, y eso es gravísimo.

Abogada Martha Arias:
Es así mismo. Es correcto.
La gente que se juega el chance o la oportunidad de quedarse aquí en Estados Unidos sin estatus sabe que eso la va a afectar a futuro, que ya en el futuro tendría que ser una petición de familiar inmediato —que es de cónyuge, padres o hijos ciudadanos americanos— si ellos son menores de edad o…

Van a tener que tener hijos ciudadanos americanos que les vayan a hacer una petición. Y esto, obviamente, es incierto, porque si en este momento no tienen una petición de esta naturaleza, pues no se ve, a corto plazo, esa posibilidad de petición.

Orian Brito:
Quiero preguntarle también sobre el tema del pago de los 100 dólares para el asilo. ¿Cómo se está viviendo esto? Porque al principio el Gobierno lo anunció, después un juez lo frenó. Por ejemplo, en las últimas peticiones que usted ha manejado en su oficina, ¿cómo se está viviendo el proceso?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Bueno, como se está viviendo el proceso… la gente está confundida. Obviamente, no es para menos: está confundida porque el Servicio de Inmigración envió notificaciones de pago a las personas que tenían el asilo pendiente.

Entonces, la notificación —o la decisión de la corte— salió el 30 de octubre, y pues muchas personas no pagaron y estaban sin saber si tenían que pagar o no.

Y no fue hasta el 7 de noviembre cuando Inmigración (USCIS) publicó en su página que iban a acatar esta orden, y que las personas que no habían pagado no tenían que pagar, aunque les hubiera llegado la notificación de pago.

Claro, entonces por lo menos esos siete días después de la orden del juez hubo incertidumbre: no se sabía si se tenía que pagar, si no se tenía que pagar… hasta que publican oficialmente y USCIS lo reconoce.

Ahora, en este momento, como está la notificación escrita y publicada por USCIS, la gente ya sabe que no lo tiene que pagar porque pueden leer esa notificación oficial.

Pero yo diría que el periodo de incertidumbre fue más que todo esos siete días después de la decisión del juez. Personas que pagaron la tarifa saben, con esa misma publicación oficial, que no les van a devolver su dinero.

En este momento yo creo que ya la gente está más tranquila y entiende más. Pero aun así creo que todavía hay gente preguntando —en nuestra oficina también—:
“¿Tengo que pagar la tarifa? ¿No la tengo que pagar?”.

Incluso, en las cortes a veces la gente dice: “Bueno, eso fue con Inmigración, ¿pero qué está pasando con la corte?”.

Entonces sí, todavía hay confusión en algunas personas, pero ya es oficial que no tenían —o que no tienen— que hacer ese pago de esos 100 dólares.

Orian Brito:
Claro. Ya para ir cerrando, abogada… Ayer estuve hablando —conversábamos con la abogada de inmigración, Martha Arias— sobre el tema de la certificación laboral, un mecanismo que para algunos puede ser una vía para permanecer en Estados Unidos.

Y hay un caso particular que me ha escrito —y me ha hecho mucho énfasis en esto— porque él tiene su propia firma, ha construido su propia empresa. Él dice… él me comenta que es autodidacta, que en el área del diseño arquitectónico tiene su propia firma y que él siente que no necesitaría un sponsor para aplicar por esa certificación, ya que él presta su servicio de diseño a través de su firma.

Y él tiene como esas dudas porque, claro, el punto está aquí… Ayer me decía un colega suyo que cuando tú acumulas… estás ilegal, aplicar a un trámite es muy difícil porque tendrías que salir.

Entonces, ¿qué se le puede recomendar a las personas que están viendo esta opción? Especialmente para aquellos que tenían TPS, ya no lo tienen, y están sin estatus.

Abogada Martha Arias:
A ver, lo que es el proceso de certificación laboral es un proceso viable. Pero como usted bien lo dice, si la persona ya está fuera de estatus, incluso los que tuvieron TPS por mucho tiempo y les aprobaron la certificación laboral, muchos de ellos igual tenían que salir del país, porque el TPS no es un estatus legal para poder recibir la residencia en esa categoría de empleo.

Entonces, a esas personas yo les recomiendo que consulten bien con un abogado, porque es posible obtener la residencia a través de esa certificación laboral, pero deben analizar bien el caso:

  • si van a salir del país,
  • si van a tener que pedir un perdón por presencia ilegal,
  • si van a requerir un waiver,
  • si van a tener un familiar que los califique para ese perdón.

Entonces esos son los análisis que se deben hacer antes de empezar o iniciar el proceso de certificado laboral, porque es costoso: puede costar más de 15.000 dólares para una persona este proceso.

Antes de empezar y pagar todo ese dinero, hay que mirar primero hacia adelante:

  • si la persona va a poder recibir la residencia cuando salga del país a recibirla en el consulado,
  • si podrá recibirla porque tiene un familiar que califica para presentar el perdón,
  • o si definitivamente no tiene quien lo califique para el perdón.

Si no tiene quien lo califique, no podrá presentar ese perdón. Entonces, ¿para qué va a invertir 15.000 dólares —o quién sabe cuánto— para llegar a un punto cero? Un punto muerto.

Esos son los análisis que deben hacer las personas antes de iniciar.

Pero hay muchos venezolanos que están haciendo procesos de certificación laboral porque han trabajado para compañías por mucho tiempo y tienen ese patrocinio de esa compañía. Yo los animo a que lo hagan porque, si lo pueden hacer y no van a ser inadmisibles, obviamente es una gran oportunidad para ellos —aunque tengan que salir del país—.

Son muchas cosas, muchos factores los que se deben analizar. Cada caso se analiza bajo tres hechos. Ese análisis requiere, yo diría, no una, sino dos o hasta tres consultas u opiniones de distintos abogados.

Orian Brito:
Hay un tema… Yo conozco el caso de una chica que se le fue aprobada, pero estaba esperando un permiso de viaje, y el permiso de viaje nunca le llegó. Y claro, tiene su asilo porque tenía un asilo pendiente, tenía TPS y ahora todo…

Claro, ¿cómo queda ese permiso de viaje que todavía está esperando, donde además tiene su asilo pendiente y ya tenía esa certificación aprobada?

Es bastante compleja esa situación, sobre todo cuando la última…

Abogada Martha Arias:
Si no recibió ese permiso de viaje, aunque se lo aprueben ahora, no va a tener efecto porque ya el TPS no existe. Porque ha quedado terminado.

Entonces, ahí no va a tener una forma de regresar y que la dejen entrar a continuar con estatus de TPS.

Ahora, si tiene un asilo pendiente, tiene que pedir también un permiso de viaje, que se llama “Refugee Travel Document”, que es un permiso de viaje para aquellas personas que tienen el asilo pendiente.

Porque si ella sale con el permiso del TPS de viaje, realmente no va a regresar con el TPS. Y si no presenta el permiso de viaje a través del asilo, no va a poder regresar a continuar con ese asilo tampoco, porque se va a considerar abandonado.

Una persona que presenta un asilo y sale sin permiso… ese asilo se considera abandonado. Hay que pedir un permiso de viaje con el asilo, con el asilo.

En conclusión: muchas personas que estaban en esta situación tenían que pedir los dos permisos:

  • el permiso de viaje con el TPS, y
  • el permiso de viaje con el asilo.

Muy complicado, porque eso es casi incomprensible para las personas que no son abogadas. Y, incluso, para nosotros los abogados nos quedamos confundidos… porque uno se pregunta: “¿Por qué tengo que hacer esto?”, pero es que la ley lo requiere.

Porque son dos figuras distintas que requieren dos peticiones distintas de viaje para poder regresar y retomar sus trámites.

Orian Brito:
Perfecto. Gracias a la abogada Martha Arias. Me gustaría que dé su número de teléfono para cualquier persona que quiera sentarse… Si usted quiere explorar el tema de la certificación laboral, si desea —como en el caso de la chica que estoy comentando— pedir ese permiso de viaje adicional, sentarse con ella, tramitar su asilo, ajustar estatus, petición familiar… bueno, ya sabe: de todo, de todo esto.

Entonces, ¿dónde la pueden contactar?

Abogada Martha Arias:
El teléfono de mi oficina es 305-671-0018. Lo repito: 305-671-0018.

Mi página web es ariasvilla.com. Ahí pueden encontrar la dirección, teléfono, mis redes sociales, Instagram… todo está allí en esa página: ariasvilla.com.

Orian Brito:
Ariasvilla.com, perfecto. Seguimos pendientes del tema migratorio y también del caso de Venezuela. Cierro rapidito con estas dos cosas.

El senador Lindsey Graham ha escrito en los últimos minutos —a quienes se preguntan qué está pasando en Venezuela— que deben entender que el presidente Trump habla muy en serio cuando se trata de detener al narcoestado venezolano, que continúa envenenando a estadounidenses con droga.

“El presidente Trump también considera que Maduro es un líder ilegítimo, cuyos días están contados. Coincido con la evaluación del presidente sobre la situación de Venezuela. No considero a Maduro un líder legítimo, sino un narcotraficante acusado en tribunales.”

Esas son declaraciones que se están dando al margen del anuncio que ha hecho el Secretario de Guerra sobre la operación Lanza del Sur.

¿Qué más? Repito lo que aquí dice un colega de la agencia —no de la agencia, del diario El País— David Alandete, que está en Washington:

“Estados Unidos acelera hacia un escenario inédito en dos décadas. Estudia golpear objetivos en Venezuela mientras convierte su ofensiva antidrogas en una operación militar de largo recorrido. Trump estudia ataques selectivos dentro de Venezuela. La campaña antidrogas pasa a llamarse Operación Lanza del Sur. Como lo dije: despliegan cerca de 12.000 efectivos y una docena de buques en el Caribe, y la Casa Blanca identifica pistas, campamentos y nudos logísticos del chavismo como posibles blancos.”

Eso está en desarrollo. Abogada, estaremos pendientes de este otro tema.

Le agradezco el tiempo. Repito el número de la abogada Martha Arias: 305-671-0018. Repito: 305-671-0018. Le mando un fuerte abrazo y me alegra que esté de vuelta.

Abogada Martha Arias:
Gracias a usted. Gracias por invitarme. Estaré con ustedes aquí con mucho gusto.

Orian Brito:
Y pendiente de lo que pase porque estamos en la región. Colombia y Venezuela son países hermanos que viven una realidad particular, y bueno, esperamos que todo el mundo esté lo mejor posible pronto.

Un abrazo para todos. Dejen sus comentarios y preguntas y nos conectamos próximamente, amigos. Gracias.

ENGLISH TRANSLATION:

Orian Brito:
Hello friends, happy Thursday. A hug for all of you. Thank you for connecting, for being part of this community. There is various information. One has to do with immigration, another has to do with Venezuela, which although it is not immigration itself, I am going to say it because it is developing. But listen to this.

A new attempt arises from United States congressmembers to reverse the decision that put an end to TPS for Venezuelans. Today we know that more than 125 Democratic legislators presented a document before the Court of Appeals of the Ninth Circuit today so that the measure that ended this immigration benefit is annulled, even after the Supreme Court, as you know, backed the government to end TPS.

What real impact can this action have? Could it mean new hope for Venezuelans who lost their TPS? Today I am speaking with a very dear attorney, a very professional woman who always gives me her time to talk about the topic. It is the immigration attorney Martha Arias, who is going to help us understand the legal scope of this decision.

Attorney, how are you?

Attorney Martha Arias:
Good afternoon, or good morning, or… or night already. It is night now, rather.

Orian Brito:
How are you doing?

Attorney Martha Arias:
Thank you very much for your invitation. It is a pleasure for me to be here with you, with your audience. I am well, well, a lot of work, many things to do, but that is what we are here for, with health.

Orian Brito:
That is what is most important, attorney. I want to ask you: what does this action by the legislators imply? It became known today, November 12, but well, the TPS on November 7 we can practically say ended. What impact could this decision have in the Ninth Circuit?

Attorney Martha Arias:
I honestly believe it will not have any impact from a legal point of view. What these 120 congressmembers presented —including a Democratic congresswoman from Florida, Debbie Wasserman Schultz— is what is called in English an “amicus brief.”

An “amicus brief” is like a memorandum of arguments known as “friend of the court.” That is, this group of congressmembers presents this document to the court asking that this petition to end TPS for Venezuela be reconsidered.

They argue, inside this memorandum of arguments or inside this “amicus brief,” the following:

That the law does not grant the Executive —in this case the Department of Homeland Security— the freedom to make the decision to end TPS for political reasons.

That the law gives the freedom to do so for humanitarian reasons, but not political ones.

So these senators consider that, when the Executive ended the TPS and the arguments it presented, it is as if they rewrote the law —“rewrite the law”— meaning, as if they interpreted it in their own way, but that Congress did not have the intention of interpreting the law in this way for it to be applied to TPS.

In other words, as if to say that the senators are saying: “We, Congress, interpret the TPS law in a different way than the Executive is interpreting it, and therefore this TPS should not be ended.”

But look, this is an “amicus brief” that is being presented just now, when this decision is already final. Of course, there are certain petitions that are presented post-decision. That is what is called post-decision petitions, petitions that are presented after there is a decision. Legally they can be done, obviously, but well…

I do not know what legal impact it will have. I think it has more of a political support or recognition from the Democrats to the Venezuelan people and to TPS, like a gesture, like a “we are going to act for the benefit of these Venezuelans.”

But I think it is late —first— and second, that maybe this measure will not be so strong, at least at this stage, because they did not do it before… because it did not happen before… because they were not there before. That is what…

Orian Brito:
By the way, about the tension in Venezuela, I want to take advantage of this moment —which was what I was going to say, that it does not have to do with immigration— but you know that we have seen a deployment from the United States in the Caribbean. There is tension between the United States and Venezuela. The United States has attacked some narco-boats, and only as information, today the Secretary of War just informed it moments ago.

He says that President Trump —I am going to read it verbatim— ordered action, and the Department of War is complying. “Today I announce,” he says, “Operation Spear of the South, directed by the Joint Task Forces of the Southern Command. This mission defends our nation, eliminates the narco-terrorists of our hemisphere, and protects our country from the drugs that are killing our people. The Western Hemisphere is America’s neighborhood and we are going to protect it.”

That is the announcement. They announce as of today this operation “Spear of the South.” What is the scope, where is it going, or how is it going? We cannot say. I am not an astrologer, nor a military expert, but the operation already has a name, an objective: to eradicate narco-terrorism.

So we will be watching what happens in the coming hours.

Notice that… I want to ask the attorney: while Venezuelans continue in this dilemma, what to do? The advisable thing, in any case, would be not to wait for what the Ninth Circuit of Appeals may decide, but to look for another path, as has been discussed previously.

Because this… first, we are already on November 12, we are approaching a date when the United States —or the entire world— begins to go on vacation, etc. We do not have, let’s say, a tentative date when this could be decided.

Attorney Martha Arias:
That is correct. We do not have a tentative date. And possibly —whether it is fast or for next year— but Venezuelans definitely…

There are some who may still have a legal status through the asylum they have pending, if they indeed have a pending asylum.
Others who have the benefit of a family petition —whether from a spouse, parents, or children— will also have that privilege.

But there is the large number of Venezuelans who were only protected by TPS, who did not file asylum, and who definitely at this moment —on November 13— are totally unprotected and without legal status.

So the decision would have to come very quickly to be positive for that group of Venezuelans who are totally unprotected. I hope that a decision comes from Congress, but directly from Congress, not through the courts, because these litigations —you know— go and come, go and come.

If one part were to win here, surely the government is going to appeal again, and appeal again, and we return to this vicious circle.

Orian Brito:
But it is a circle that ends in the same place, where the Supreme Court tells the government: “You have the right to remove it,” and then people are left in limbo.

I, being Venezuelan, and I try to provide service through this platform, I condemn —and I say it publicly— giving people a hope that I feel is a delicate hope. That is, it does not give solidity to people.

Yes, “we are going to go to the Ninth Circuit,” and people sit and wait for the Ninth Circuit.
No. If you have no other process, you are accumulating unlawful presence in the United States, and that is very serious.

Attorney Martha Arias:
It is exactly that. It is correct.
People who take the chance or the opportunity to stay here in the United States without status know that it will affect them in the future; that in the future it would have to be through an immediate relative petition —which is for spouse, parents, or U.S. citizen children— if they are minors or…

They would have to have U.S. citizen children who will file a petition for them. And this is obviously uncertain, because if at this moment they do not have a petition of that nature, well, that possibility is not seen in the short term.

Orian Brito:
I also want to ask you about the topic of the 100-dollar payment for asylum. How is this being experienced? Because at first the government announced it, then a judge stopped it. For example, in the most recent petitions you have handled in your office, how is the process being experienced?

Attorney Martha Arias:
Well, how the process is being experienced… people are confused. Obviously, it is not for less: they are confused because the immigration service sent payment notices to people who had pending asylum.

So the notice —or the court’s decision— came out on October 30, and many people did not pay and were not sure if they had to pay or not.

And it was not until November 7 when Immigration (USCIS) published on its website that they were going to comply with this order and that people who had not paid did not have to pay, even if they had received the payment notice.

Of course, during those seven days after the judge’s order there was uncertainty: they did not know if they had to pay, if they did not have to pay… until they published it and officially USCIS recognized it.

Now, at this moment, because the written and published notice exists from USCIS, people now know they do not have to pay because they can read that official notice.

But I would say that the period of uncertainty was mainly those seven days after the judge’s decision.People who paid the fee know, with that same official publication, that they are not going to get their money back.

At this moment, I believe people are already calmer and understand more. But I still think there are people asking —in our office too—:
“Do I have to pay the fee? Do I not have to pay it?”

Even in the courts sometimes people say: “Well, that was with Immigration, but what is happening with the court?”

So yes, there is still confusion among some people, but it is already official that they did not have to —or do not have to— make that payment of those hundred dollars.

Orian Brito:
Of course. Now, to close, attorney… Yesterday I was talking —we were talking with immigration attorney Martha Arias— about the topic of labor certification, a mechanism that for some can be a way to remain in the United States.

And there is a particular case that wrote to me —and has emphasized this a lot— because he has his own firm, has built his own company. He says… He tells me that he is self-taught, that in the area of architectural design he has his own firm, and that he feels he wouldn’t need a sponsor to apply for that certification since he provides his design services through his firm.

And he has those doubts because, of course, here is the point… Yesterday a colleague of yours told me that when you accumulate… when you are illegal, applying for a process is very difficult because you would have to leave.

So what can be recommended to people who are looking at this option? Especially those who had TPS, no longer have it, and are without status.

Attorney Martha Arias:
Let’s see, what is the labor certification process is a viable process. But as you correctly say, if the person is already out of status —even those who had TPS for a long time and had the labor certification approved— many of them also had to leave the country, because TPS is not a lawful status that allows you to receive permanent residence in that employment category.

So, to those people, I recommend that they consult well with an attorney, because it is possible to obtain residence through that labor certification, but they must analyze the case carefully:

  • if they are going to leave the country,
  • if they are going to have to request a waiver for unlawful presence,
  • if they are going to need a waiver,
  • if they have a relative who qualifies them for that waiver.

Those are the analyses that must be done before starting or initiating the labor certification process, because it is costly: it can cost more than $15,000 for a person.

Before starting and paying all that money, you must first look ahead:

  • whether the person will be able to receive residence when leaving the country to receive it at the consulate,
  • whether they will be able to receive it because they have a qualifying relative to file the waiver,
  • or whether they absolutely do not have anyone who qualifies them for the waiver.

If they have no one who qualifies them, they will not be able to submit that waiver. So why invest $15,000 —or who knows how much— to reach a zero point? A dead end.

Those are the analyses people must undertake before beginning.

But there are many Venezuelans doing labor certification processes because they have worked for companies for a long time and have the sponsorship from that company. I encourage them to do it because, if they can do it and they are not going to be inadmissible, then obviously that is a big opportunity for them —even if they have to leave the country.

There are many things, many factors that must be analyzed. Each case is analyzed under three facts. That analysis requires, I would say, not only one, but two or even three consultations or opinions from different attorneys.

Orian Brito:
There is a topic… I know the case of a girl whose labor certification was approved, but she was waiting for a travel permit, and the travel permit never arrived. And of course, she has her asylum because she had a pending asylum, she had TPS, and now everything…

Of course, how does that travel permit stand —that she is still waiting for— where she also has a pending asylum and already had that certification approved?

It is quite complex, especially when the last…

Attorney Martha Arias:
If she did not receive that travel permit, even if it arrives now and is approved, it will have no effect because TPS no longer exists. Because it has ended.

So there will not be a way for her to return and be allowed to enter to continue with TPS status.

Now, if she has a pending asylum, she also has to request a travel permit called the “Refugee Travel Document,” which is a travel permit for people who have asylum pending.

Because if she leaves with the TPS travel permit, she is not really going to return with TPS. And if she does not submit the travel permit through the asylum, she will not be able to return to continue with that asylum either, because it will be considered abandoned.

A person who has filed asylum and leaves without permission… that asylum is considered abandoned. You have to request a travel permit with the asylum, with the asylum.

In conclusion, many people who were in this situation had to request both permits:

the travel permit with TPS, and

the travel permit with the asylum.

Very complicated, because that is almost incomprehensible for people who are not attorneys. And even for us, the attorneys, we are left confused… because one asks: “Why do I have to do this?” But that is what the law requires.

Because they are two different categories that require two different petitions for travel to be able to return and resume their processes.

Orian Brito:
Perfect. Thanks to attorney Martha Arias. I would like you to give your phone number for anyone who wants to sit down… If you want to explore the topic of labor certification, if you want —as in the case of the girl I am mentioning— to request that additional travel permit, to sit with her, process your asylum, adjust status, family petition… well, you already know, all of this.

So, where can they contact you?

Attorney Martha Arias:
The phone number of my office is 305-671-0018. I repeat: 305-671-0018.

My website is ariasvilla.com. There you can find the address, phone number, my social media, Instagram… everything is there on that page: ariasvilla.com.

Orian Brito:
Ariasvilla.com, perfect. We continue to monitor the immigration issue and also the case of Venezuela. I’ll close quickly with these two things.

Senator Lindsey Graham has written in the last few minutes —to those who wonder what is happening in Venezuela— that they must understand that President Trump speaks very seriously when it comes to stopping the Venezuelan narco-state, which continues poisoning Americans with drugs.

“President Trump also considers Maduro an illegitimate leader whose days are numbered. I agree with the president’s assessment of the situation in Venezuela. I do not consider Maduro a legitimate leader, but rather a narcotrafficker indicted in courts.”

Those are statements being made on the sidelines of the announcement made by the Secretary of War about the Spear of the South operation.

What else? I repeat what a colleague from the agency —not the agency, the El País newspaper— David Alandete, who is in Washington, says:

“The United States accelerates toward an unprecedented scenario in two decades. It is studying striking targets in Venezuela while turning its anti-drug offensive into a long-term military operation. Trump is studying selective strikes inside Venezuela. The anti-drug campaign is now called Operation Spear of the South. As I said, they are deploying about 12,000 personnel and a dozen ships in the Caribbean, and the White House identifies airstrips, camps, and logistical hubs of chavismo as possible targets.”

That is developing. Attorney, we will be attentive to this other issue.

I thank you for your time. I repeat the number of attorney Martha Arias: 305-671-0018. I repeat: 305-671-0018. I send you a big hug and I’m glad you’re back.

Attorney Martha Arias:
Thank you. Thank you for inviting me. I will be here with you with great pleasure.

Orian Brito:
And attentive to what happens because we are in the region. Colombia and Venezuela are brother countries that live a particular reality, and well, we hope everyone will be as well as possible soon.

A hug for everyone. Leave your comments and questions, and we will connect again soon, friends. Thank you.

The post Understanding the Latest TPS Developments appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..

]]> https://ariasvilla.com/understanding-the-latest-tps-developments/feed/ 0 After TPS: The Hard Truth Facing Venezuelans in the U.S. https://ariasvilla.com/after-tps-the-hard-truth-facing-venezuelans-in-the-u-s/ https://ariasvilla.com/after-tps-the-hard-truth-facing-venezuelans-in-the-u-s/#respond Wed, 12 Nov 2025 19:16:25 +0000 https://ariasvilla.com/?p=11787 The post After TPS: The Hard Truth Facing Venezuelans in the U.S. appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..

]]>

In my recent interview on Unión Radio, with Eduardo Rodríguez and Saúl Noriega, I spoke about the complex reality that many Venezuelans are facing today after the termination of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for their community.

This is not only a legal matter but also a deeply human one. Each person’s story is different, and each case requires individual attention. Yet there are certain common threads among all: uncertainty, fear of losing protection, and the pressure to make difficult decisions amid changing immigration policies and false expectations.

FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA

The Human Impact Behind the Numbers

When people hear that “250,000 Venezuelans will be affected”, it sounds abstract — but behind that number are families, jobs, and futures built over years of hard work. Some Venezuelans have found legal pathways through marriage to U.S. citizens or residents, others through their U.S.-born or recently naturalized children who can now file petitions on their behalf.

For these individuals, there are solutions available through family-based petitions and adjustment of status.

However, many others remain in more fragile circumstances. Some have pending asylum cases, others have received denials, and others never filed any petition at all. The latter are now in what I would call an “immigration limbo” — a vulnerable space where there is no protection and no immediate path forward.

Those who still have an asylum application pending can continue with their process and maintain their work permit through asylum. But as I explained in the interview, asylum is one of the most difficult protections to win in U.S. immigration law. It requires extensive evidence, time, and preparation. When denied, the person can be referred to Immigration Court and placed in removal proceedings. This means that while asylum provides temporary protection, it is an unstable safeguard.

The Responsibility of Staying Without Legal Status

One question I was asked was whether it is “responsible” for someone without papers to remain in the U.S., waiting for a potential change in administration or court decision that could reverse the end of TPS.

As an attorney, I must say: staying in the country without status is not responsible from a legal standpoint. It places the individual — and their family — in a constant state of risk. Detention or deportation can occur at any moment, and without prior preparation, it can leave loved ones unprotected.

If someone decides to remain despite the risks, it is essential to make contingency plans: designate guardianship for children, clarify financial and property management, and ensure that family members are informed and prepared. These are difficult conversations, but they are acts of responsibility toward one’s family.

I understand, however, that many people feel they cannot return. Venezuela’s political and humanitarian crisis has pushed countless families to make impossible choices. My role as an immigration attorney is not to judge these decisions but to provide honest guidance and realistic options.

A Historical Perspective: TPS Has Always Been Temporary

Many people believe that because TPS has been renewed in the past, it will always continue. Historically, it has indeed been extended multiple times. For example, TPS for Nicaragua and Honduras has lasted for over 27 years since 1998. Those beneficiaries built entire lives in the U.S. under that protection.

However, TPS — as its name says — is temporary. It can end when the government determines that conditions in the designated country have improved or for policy reasons.

In the current case of Venezuela, the government did not specifically claim that the conditions in the country had changed; rather, it based the termination on broader administrative arguments, including recent security concerns. Unfortunately, those isolated cases have overshadowed the reality that the vast majority of Venezuelans in the U.S. are law-abiding individuals who came seeking safety and opportunity.

As of now, there is at least one pending lawsuit in California challenging the termination of TPS, but until a court issues a new ruling, affected individuals must prepare for all possible outcomes.

Miami Immigration Lawyer - Humanitarian Parole Services

The Rise of Misleading Visa Offers: The EB-2 “National Interest Waiver”

Another subject I addressed during the interview is the growing number of misleading offers surrounding the EB-2 National Interest Waiver — often referred to as “EB-2 NIW.”

This type of petition is legitimate and valuable for qualified individuals. It allows certain professionals with advanced degrees or exceptional abilities to apply for residency without employer sponsorship if they can show that their work benefits the national interest of the United States.

However, the problem lies in how this visa is being promoted. Recently, it has been heavily commercialized on social media and by unqualified agents as if it were available to anyone with a university degree and five years of experience. Some people are being charged $15,000 to $20,000 for these applications, with the false promise of guaranteed approval.

That is simply not true. The EB-2 NIW requires a strong academic, professional, and salary profile — not just a diploma. It demands detailed evidence of national impact, publications, achievements, or unique expertise. Unfortunately, I have seen many cases denied because individuals were misled into believing they qualified when they did not.

Before investing large amounts of money in any immigration process, always verify the attorney’s credentials, review the requirements with a licensed immigration lawyer, and ensure that the petition is legally sound.

The end of TPS for Venezuelans has caused understandable concern and confusion. Yet, despite the uncertainty, there are still lawful paths available for those who qualify. It’s essential to act wisely, avoid misinformation, and stay informed through credible sources and licensed professionals.

If you or someone you know is affected by the end of TPS or has been approached with offers that sound “too good to be true,” seek proper legal advice before taking any step.

You may contact my office at 305-671-0018 or follow me on social media for updates and educational content. Staying informed and guided by reliable information is the best protection you can have in uncertain times.

Disclaimer:
This publication is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reading this article does not create an attorney-client relationship. For personalized advice, please schedule a consultation with an immigration attorney.

SPANISH TRANSCRIPT:

HOST:
Martha Arias, abogada de inmigración, gran colaboradora de este espacio, está en Miami, Estados Unidos, y la tenemos vía telefónica. Martha, como siempre, muy gentil, un gusto tenerte por acá.

Abogada Martha Arias:
Buenos días, Eduardo y Saúl. Un saludo para ustedes, muchísimas gracias por invitarme. Es un placer para mí estar con ustedes.

HOST:
¡Caramba! Pero qué bella eres, qué buena energía, qué educación. Con esa entrada, imagínate tú, Martha, eso no lo hace todo el mundo. Gracias, gracias, gracias en la distancia.

Abogada Martha Arias:
Gracias, gracias a ustedes. Eres una dama.

HOST:
Mira, Martha, primero: ¿son realmente 250.000 las personas que están afectadas directamente por esta decisión del TPS? Y un poco de manera redundante, pero para ir al detalle posible, ¿cuál es la perspectiva para ellos en medio de lo que está pasando?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Bueno, es un poco complicada la perspectiva para la mayoría. Y digo la mayoría porque, como usted podrá entender, muchos van a tener una suerte distinta. Cada uno va a tener su propia suerte.
Aquellas personas que se casaron con ciudadanos americanos —que yo tengo varios de ellos, incluso con residentes— pueden tener una forma de resolver su estatus migratorio. También tengo venezolanos que tenían el TPS y cuyos hijos son ciudadanos americanos o se hicieron recientemente ciudadanos americanos. Ellos también pueden hacer un ajuste de estatus y pedir su residencia.

Pero hay otras personas que tienen el asilo, todavía con una solicitud pendiente. Esas personas deben continuar con su petición de asilo y el permiso de trabajo a través del mismo. Obviamente, es una situación muy inestable, porque el asilo —como usted bien sabrá— es una aplicación que se presenta, hay que probar demasiado, y es muy difícil ganarlo. Si se lo niegan, eventualmente pueden ser enviados a una corte de inmigración para una posible deportación. Entonces, esos que tienen el asilo están protegidos, pero de una forma inestable, diría yo.

Y finalmente, están los que ya no tienen nada que hacer: los que no presentaron petición de asilo, no tienen asilo pendiente, no tienen familia que los pida… esos están prácticamente en un limbo migratorio. Esos son los que más nos preocupan.

HOST:
Ahora, doctora, fíjese: el tema político que tanto influye en este tipo de decisiones —pendiente también de lo que veníamos conversando— el tema de la perspectiva y del futuro, sobre todo para los que dicen “yo no tengo papeles, pero si sale una decisión del tribunal tal o incluso la administración Trump cambia esto, yo me quedo y me aguanto”. ¿Es una decisión responsable, sobre todo para quien piensa así con su familia al lado?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Bueno, yo pienso que obviamente responsable no es, porque uno, pues, está en los Estados Unidos en violación de la ley; y dos, vive en una incertidumbre total, en la que en cualquier momento lo pueden detener, arrestar, llevar a detención, y su familia, sus bienes, sus pertenencias, quedan sometidos a un drama o a una situación complicada.

Las personas deben prepararse si van a quedarse en esas circunstancias: cómo manejar la tutela o la potestad de sus hijos, cómo sus bienes van a ser administrados. Todo esto, porque sería muy complicado que una persona sea arrestada, no tenga papeles y, de un momento a otro, no pueda responder por su familia.

Lo otro que considero es que, sí, hay personas que se juegan ese chance —vamos a llamarlo así— o toman ese riesgo, y en el futuro resuelven de alguna manera. Claro que hay muchas personas que lo hacen así, pero desde el punto de vista legal, obviamente, como abogada, no puedo decir que es responsable. Sin embargo, entiendo a muchas personas que no quieren regresar o que definitivamente no pueden regresar a su país y tienen que jugarse esta carta de esa manera.

HOST:
Amigos, estamos conversando con Martha Arias desde Miami, vía telefónica, abogada de inmigración. Tomando en cuenta tu especialidad y conocimiento histórico, una situación así —vista más allá del TPS para venezolanos, observando el todo del tema migratorio en Estados Unidos— ¿tiene precedentes? Porque, al final, uno se pregunta: si decido quedarme en ese limbo, ¿hasta qué punto puedo sobrevivir en medio de ese laberinto?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Desde el punto de vista histórico, el TPS siempre se ha extendido, se ha vuelto a otorgar. De hecho, sabemos que el TPS de Nicaragua y Honduras estaba vigente desde 1998 y duró prácticamente 27 años siendo extendido. Las personas tenían derecho al permiso de trabajo y vivían aquí por casi tres décadas.

Pero sí, bajo la ley, el TPS, como lo dice su propio nombre, es una protección temporal. Puede ser eliminado si hay cambios en las condiciones del país o ciertas circunstancias. En este caso, el gobierno no adujo realmente cambios en las condiciones del país; más bien, argumentó una situación de protección y sostuvo que muchas de las personas que habían entrado recientemente y aplicaron para el TPS pertenecían al “Tren de Aragua”.

Obviamente, todos sabemos que esas son pocas personas, y la gran mayoría son trabajadores honestos, incluso muchos que entraron con visa. Pero, aun así, el gobierno ha terminado el TPS en otras ocasiones. En este caso, las demandas que se presentaron ganaron ciertas batallas, pero no la guerra. Llegaron hasta la Corte Suprema, donde la Corte claramente apoyó al Ejecutivo en la terminación del TPS.

Aparentemente, tengo conocimiento de que hay una demanda pendiente en California sobre esto, pero no tengo mucha información porque aún no se ha hecho pública. En su debido momento, cuando ya se anuncie y tengamos claridad de lo que están pidiendo las partes demandantes, podremos conversar al respecto.

Por ahora, las personas deben protegerse: o salir del país, o continuar con su asilo, o tomar sus riesgos.

HOST:
Doctora, ya nos queda un minuto y medio. En su práctica cotidiana, ¿qué tipo de peticiones predominan entre los venezolanos que acuden a su oficina? ¿Le piden ayuda para quedarse o para mantener sus papeles en regla y poder viajar hacia otro país?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Mire, sinceramente, la mayoría —yo diría un 40 o 45 por ciento— se están inclinando por peticiones laborales a través de empleadores, lo cual es correcto; hay ciertas peticiones que se pueden hacer. Pero la mayoría debe salir del país, no pueden ajustar estatus ni recibir su residencia aquí con esas peticiones de empleo.

Sin embargo, hay mucha desinformación, porque a veces la gente no entiende que debe salir del país. Inician estos procesos costosos sin saber que deberán salir a recibir la residencia fuera de Estados Unidos. Me da mucha pena por ellos, porque invierten dinero y tiempo para luego enterarse de eso.

Otros están aplicando para lo que se ha promocionado —o mercadeado, porque realmente es mercadeo— como la “EB-2 National Interest Waiver”, o EB-2 con interés nacional. Es una petición de residencia para personas con habilidades extraordinarias, que pueden demostrar estar en el top de su profesión o carrera. Pero se requiere probar bastante.

Últimamente la están comercializando, como digo yo, como pan diario. Y eso no es así. No es una visa para todo el mundo. Requiere calificaciones, un perfil profesional, académico, laboral y de salario muy alto. Pero se la venden por 15 o 20 mil dólares. Es costosa. Le hacen creer que con tener un título universitario y cinco años de experiencia ya califican, y no es cierto. Me da mucha pena ver personas con esas visas denegadas después de invertir tanto dinero.

Así que, sí, mucha gente está recurriendo a la EB-2 de Interés Nacional con esperanza, gastando dinero, y no siempre es la opción adecuada. El resto de las personas —la mayoría— siguen afianzadas en el asilo. Yo diría otro 40 por ciento. Y un pequeño grupo ha decidido hacer su petición a través del matrimonio, obviamente de buena fe, con intención genuina de vida en pareja. Algunos no se habían casado por ser jóvenes o por esperar alguna situación familiar, pero ante las circunstancias, han decidido hacerlo.

HOST:
Muchísimas gracias, Martha. Qué gentil y qué interesante aporte en medio de este tema tan delicado para tantos venezolanos. Un gran abrazo.

Abogada Martha Arias:
Muchísimas gracias. Un abrazo para ustedes y feliz resto de semana.

HOST:
Igualmente, Martha Arias, abogada de inmigración. Qué buena vocera, qué respuestas tan técnicas. Muchos están aprovechando la preocupación de los venezolanos y les están vendiendo cosas que no son. Y ese es otro punto al que hay que prestarle atención.

ENGLISH TRANSLATION:

HOST:
Martha Arias, immigration attorney and great collaborator of this program, is in Miami, United States, and we have her on the phone line. Martha, as always, very kind—such a pleasure to have you with us.

Attorney Martha Arias:
Good morning, Eduardo and Saúl. A greeting to both of you, and thank you very much for inviting me. It’s a pleasure for me to be with you.

HOST:
Goodness! You are so lovely, what good energy, what manners. With that introduction—imagine! Martha, not everyone does that. Thank you, thank you, thank you, from afar.

Attorney Martha Arias:
Thank you, thank you to you. You are very kind.

HOST:
Look, Martha, first—are there really 250,000 people directly affected by this TPS decision? And, to be a little redundant but go into detail if possible—what is the outlook for them in the midst of what is happening?

Attorney Martha Arias:
Well, the outlook is a little complicated for the majority. And I say “the majority” because, as you can understand, many will have a different fate. Each one will have their own fate.
Those who married U.S. citizens — and I have several of them, even with residents — may have a way to resolve their immigration status. I also have Venezuelans who had TPS and whose children are U.S. citizens or recently became citizens. They too can adjust status and apply for residency.

But there are other people who have asylum, still with a pending application. Those individuals must continue with their asylum case and their work permit through asylum. Obviously, it is also a very unstable situation because, as you well know, asylum is an application that must be proven extensively. It is very difficult to win, and if denied, they can eventually be sent to immigration court for possible deportation. So those who have asylum are protected, but in an unstable way, I would say.

And finally, there are those who have nothing left to do — those who did not file for asylum, do not have a pending case, and do not have family members to petition for them. Those are practically in an immigration limbo. They are the ones we worry about the most.

HOST:
Now, attorney, consider this—the political factor that so strongly influences these types of decisions. Regarding what we were talking about—the outlook and the future—especially for those who say, “I don’t have papers, but if a certain court decision comes out, or if the Trump administration changes this, I’ll stay and hold on.” Is that a responsible decision, especially for someone thinking that way with their family beside them?

Attorney Martha Arias:
Well, I think that, obviously, it is not responsible because, first, one is in the United States in violation of the law; and second, one is living in complete uncertainty, where at any moment they can be detained, arrested, taken into custody, and their family, their belongings, their possessions are left facing a drama or a complicated situation.

People must prepare themselves if they plan to remain under such circumstances: how to handle guardianship or custody of their children, how their assets will be managed. All of this, because it would be very difficult for a person to be arrested, have no documents, and from one moment to the next be unable to respond for their family.

Another thing I consider is that, yes, there are people who take that chance — let’s call it that — or take that risk, and in the future, they somehow manage to resolve. Of course, many people do that. But from a legal standpoint, obviously, as an attorney, I cannot say it’s responsible. However, I understand many who do not want to return or who simply cannot return to their country and must play this card this way.

HOST:
Friends, we’re speaking with Martha Arias from Miami, by phone, immigration attorney. Considering your specialty and even historical knowledge, a situation like this — not only from the perspective of the temporary protection system for Venezuelans but from the broader historical view of immigration in the United States — does it have precedent? Because, as Saúl was suggesting, in the end one wonders: if I decide to remain in that limbo, to what extent can I survive in that maze?

Attorney Martha Arias:
From a historical point of view, TPS has always been extended; it has always been renewed. In fact, we know that the TPS for Nicaragua and Honduras began in 1998 and lasted practically 27 years being extended. Those people had the right to work permits and lived here for almost three decades.

But yes, under the TPS law, as its name says, is temporary protection. It can be terminated if conditions in the country change or under certain circumstances. In this case, the government did not really claim that the conditions in Venezuela had changed; rather, it argued a situation of national protection, stating that many of the people who had recently entered and applied for TPS were members of the “Tren de Aragua.”

Obviously, we all know those are very few individuals, and the great majority are honest workers — many of them even entered with visas. But still, the government has terminated TPS in other cases. In this case, the lawsuits that were filed won some battles but not the war. They reached the Supreme Court, which clearly supported the executive branch in the termination of TPS.

Apparently, I have knowledge of a pending lawsuit in California on this issue, but I don’t have much information because it hasn’t yet been made public. At the right time, when it’s announced and we have clarity about what the plaintiffs are demanding and what arguments are being made, we can talk about it.

For now, people must protect themselves—either leave the country, continue with asylum, or take their risks.

HOST:
Attorney, we have about a minute and a half left. In your day-to-day legal practice, what trend are you seeing among Venezuelan clients? Do they ask you for help to stay in the U.S., or to maintain their papers properly to perhaps travel to another country?

Attorney Martha Arias:
Well, I’ll tell you honestly, the majority — I would say around 40 or 45 percent — are leaning toward employment-based petitions through employers, which is valid; there are certain petitions that can be done. But most of them must leave the country; they cannot adjust status or obtain residency here through those petitions.

However, there is a lot of misinformation about this because people often don’t understand they must leave the country. They begin these processes, which are very costly, without realizing that they’ll have to depart to obtain the residency abroad. I feel bad for them because they invest money only to later learn that they’ll need to leave anyway.

Others are applying for what has been promoted — or marketed, because it really is marketing — as the “EB-2 National Interest Waiver.” It’s a residence petition for people with extraordinary abilities who can show that they are at the top of their profession or occupation. But that requires significant proof.

Lately, it’s being commercialized, as I say, like daily bread. And it shouldn’t be. It is not a visa for everyone. It requires qualifications and a very high professional, academic, employment, and salary profile. Yet it’s being sold for $15,000 to $20,000. It’s extremely expensive. They tell people that if you have a university degree and more than five years of experience, you qualify. No—that’s not true. I feel sorry to see people with those visas denied after investing so much money.

So yes, many are turning to the EB-2 National Interest Waiver with hope, spending a lot of money, and it’s not always the right option. The rest — most — are still relying on asylum. I’d say another 40 percent. And a smaller group has decided to file petitions through marriage, obviously real marriages made in good faith. Some hadn’t married yet because they were young or waiting for family situations, but seeing the current circumstances, they’ve decided to take that step.

HOST:
Thank you very much, Martha. How kind, and what an insightful contribution amid this distressing issue for so many Venezuelans. A big hug.

Attorney Martha Arias:
Thank you very much. A hug to all of you, and have a wonderful rest of the week.

HOST:
Likewise, Martha Arias, immigration attorney. What a fine spokesperson—such direct, technical answers. As Eduardo was saying, many are taking advantage of Venezuelans’ worry, selling them things that aren’t true. And that’s another point we must pay attention to.

The post After TPS: The Hard Truth Facing Venezuelans in the U.S. appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..

]]> https://ariasvilla.com/after-tps-the-hard-truth-facing-venezuelans-in-the-u-s/feed/ 0 Venezuelan TPS: After the Government’s Appeal https://ariasvilla.com/venezuelan-tps-after-the-governments-appeal/ https://ariasvilla.com/venezuelan-tps-after-the-governments-appeal/#respond Thu, 11 Sep 2025 22:14:16 +0000 https://ariasvilla.com/?p=11671 The post Venezuelan TPS: After the Government’s Appeal appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..

]]>

During my conversation with journalist Orian Brito on September 9, I explained where things stand for Venezuelan nationals under Temporary Protected Status (TPS). Judge Edward Chen’s recent order keeps TPS in place for now, but the Department of Homeland Security has already appealed in the Ninth Circuit. As we have seen in prior TPS litigation, the legal fight can eventually reach the U.S. Supreme Court.

For those whose TPS (2021 designation) shows an expiration of September 10, there is an automatic 60‑day extension through November 10, 2025. In practice, that means your Employment Authorization Document (EAD) tied to TPS is also considered valid through that date, even if the card itself shows an earlier expiration. You may print the relevant USCIS notice and present it to your employer if asked for proof.

Because the litigation is fluid, I recommend re‑registering for TPS within the 60‑day window. If the courts later allow TPS to continue, your timely re‑registration helps keep you protected. If you also have other options—such as a family‑based petition, employment sponsorship, or a pending asylum case—these may offer more stability in the long run. Every situation is different; professional guidance matters.

If you need help evaluating your options or completing your TPS re‑registration, my office is here to assist at (305) 671‑0018 or ariasvilla.com. Stay informed, stay proactive, and please seek qualified legal advice before making important decisions.

Disclaimer: This post is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney‑client relationship. For advice about your specific situation, please consult a licensed attorney.

FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA

Spanish Transcript

ORIAN BRITO:
Amigos, 9 de septiembre. Más de medio millón de venezolanos con TPS en Estados Unidos están a la espera de la decisión del juez Edward Chen respecto a la apelación presentada por el Departamento de Seguridad Nacional, que busca poner fin a este beneficio migratorio. La incertidumbre es grande. Las preguntas son muchas. Ustedes me las dejan en esta red social, no solo por las licencias, sino también por qué va a pasar con el permiso de trabajo. Es una de las que leí.

Por eso, en este espacio vamos a conversar con la abogada de inmigración del sur de la Florida, Martha Arias, que nos va a ayudar a responder algunas dudas sobre lo que puede pasar con este programa, cuáles son los escenarios legales y qué significa este proceso para los venezolanos amparados bajo este estatus. Como siempre, los invito a que se queden, a que dejen sus preguntas y les agradezco que se suscriban y sean parte de esta comunidad.

Abogada, buenas tardes. El gobierno no tardó en apelar: el viernes celebramos la decisión del juez Chen y el sábado apeló. Estamos a la expectativa de lo que pueda decidirse. La apelación del gobierno pide que el juez, como que, desestime su propia decisión, algo que yo veo casi imposible, ¿no? ¿Cómo lo ve usted?

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Yo lo veo poco probable, pero tampoco imposible porque, fíjese, la apelación se hace en el Noveno Circuito, que es el circuito que le corresponde a California. El Noveno Circuito se caracteriza por ser más bien demócrata o, como la gente lo llama, liberal. Entonces, sabemos que el juez Chen tiene una tendencia más demócrata. Por eso, no veo imposible que se mantenga esa decisión del juez. Pero, igual, el gobierno está presionando fuerte porque la intención del gobierno es terminar el TPS.

ORIAN BRITO:
¿Terminarlo, terminarlo…?

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Sí. Lo mismo que pasó con el TPS del 2023 fue algo similar: ese TPS fue terminado, después el juez dijo que no; se apeló, se mantuvo esa decisión del juez; y el gobierno después fue a la Corte Suprema y la Corte Suprema fue la que finalmente dijo: “Sí, el gobierno lo puede terminar.” O sea, no fue el Noveno Circuito, la sala de apelaciones, la que dio la decisión final de terminar el TPS; la dio la misma Corte Suprema. Entonces, aquí puede pasar lo mismo.

ORIAN BRITO:
Cuando hablamos de que puede pasar lo mismo, quiere decir que, independientemente de que el juez tomó una decisión a favor, el gobierno podría —y esta pregunta me la han hecho ya esta semana— recurrir a esa vía de la Corte Suprema para decir: “Bueno, si esto lo pongo yo, ¿no tengo el derecho de quitarlo?”

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
No, pero lo que pasa es que no es, técnicamente, que él tenga el derecho de quitarlo, porque acuérdense que lo que él hizo fue una medida cautelar, que dijo: “No voy a permitir que se termine mientras el litigio continúa.” Entonces, lo que se apela es esa decisión de esa medida cautelar. Esa es la parte que puede subir a la Corte Suprema.

ORIAN BRITO:
Entre tanto, aquí hay un grupo de personas que se mantienen en un limbo. Hay dos situaciones evidentes, a juzgar por los comentarios que me hacen. Una tiene que ver con los permisos de trabajo. Algunos de estos permisos de trabajo tienen fecha de vencimiento tan pronto como mañana, 10 de septiembre, ¿no? Hay gente que me dice: “Ya sometí una extensión.” Hay gente que me dice: “Tengo dudas si es que esto automáticamente está extendido, aunque la fecha diga que vence mañana.” ¿Dónde estamos y qué se les puede decir a esas personas que tienen la incertidumbre y, por supuesto, el temor de perder su trabajo?

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Claro. Bueno, no es fácil, es complicado, pero a ver: cuando la Secretaría de Seguridad Nacional terminó el TPS del 2021 —que vence mañana—, al terminarlo, dio una prórroga automática, vamos a decir, como un periodo de prueba de 60 días. Esto quiere decir que hasta el 10 de noviembre de 2025 esos venezolanos que tenían el TPS que vence mañana, 10 de septiembre, tendrían esa prórroga automática hasta el 10 de noviembre. Eso quiere decir que su permiso de trabajo también sigue siendo válido hasta esa fecha, aunque la tarjeta diga que venció el 10 de septiembre. Es una prórroga automática.

La persona puede imprimir de la página web de inmigración la información de esa prórroga para presentársela a su empleador, si el empleador le pide esa prueba o no sabe cuál es el estatus migratorio ni la validez de ese trabajo.

Ahora, yo también les estoy recomendando a las personas que hagan una re-registración del TPS a partir de mañana, dentro de este periodo de 60 días. ¿Por qué? Porque no sabemos cómo va a continuar el litigio y, vamos a decir, que tengan la suerte de que en alguna parte de este litigio se extienda otra vez el TPS; entonces, la persona va a quedar protegida por esa re-registración que ya haya hecho.

Entonces, la situación es: la validez sería hasta el 10 de noviembre de este año, a no ser que algo, en alguna de estas cortes, autorice otra vez que se continúe con el TPS.

ORIAN BRITO:
Bueno, registrarse y entender que esa extensión podría ser, por lo pronto, para los del TPS 2021, válida por 60 días. Ahora, la gran incertidumbre es qué puede pasar después, porque los días pasan.

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
La incertidumbre es qué puede pasar después. Si hay, de pronto, alguna demanda o algo que permita que estos venezolanos puedan continuar con el TPS, pues veremos qué va a pasar. Por ahora, seguimos con el vaivén de las cosas. Todos los días es algo distinto: hay una decisión que lo termina, después una apelación dice que no, y en esas vamos. Pero, por ahora, hoy que estamos hablando, 9 de septiembre, este TPS está extendido, sigue extendido.

O sea, el gobierno apeló el sábado; esa decisión de apelación no va a salir todavía. Entonces, hoy tenemos en firme la decisión del juez Chen, del viernes, que dijo que el TPS debería continuar.

ORIAN BRITO:
OK. Aunque, en el sistema, los comentarios son variados. Hay personas que se han podido registrar, pero no les dan recibo. Otros sí lo tienen. Hay gente que no puede sacar una licencia; ha sido todo un tema…

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Los de la licencia: sí deberían permitirles sacar licencia porque el mismo boletín, o el mismo documento, dice que tiene 60 días de validez.

ORIAN BRITO:
De hecho, el propio recaudador de impuestos de Miami-Dade nos envió un comunicado donde decía que, a esas personas con ese TPS —más el permiso de trabajo—, esos eran los documentos que les permitían a la gente obtener la licencia, y lo iban a recibir hasta el 7 de noviembre de este año. Por cuánto lo van a extender o por cuánto les van a dar la licencia no me queda claro.

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Yo me imagino que si van antes, se la van a dar hasta los 60 días, hasta el vencimiento de esos 60 días, que en este caso sería el 10 de noviembre de 2025. No se la pueden dar por más tiempo, porque hasta allí es que van a tener el estatus.

ORIAN BRITO:
Claro. Bueno, quiero leer algunos de los comentarios porque, abogada, estoy contento además porque la he perseguido durante varios días; está muy full y hoy nos puede acompañar. Siempre me gusta porque —como lo digo—, abogada, hay mucha gente que entiendo que, en medio del nerviosismo, se irrita. A veces el abogado no dice lo que la gente quiere escuchar, pero yo creo que, en este momento, la preparación y escuchar, sobre todo, lo que no te gusta, es lo que te puede brindar la verdadera luz del camino a seguir, para que busques una forma y te estabilices en el país.

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Exacto. El problema es que hay personas que sí tienen una forma de resolver su estatus migratorio porque tienen un esposo ciudadano americano o residente, o tienen una petición familiar de un padre o un hermano.

ORIAN BRITO:
O un empleador.

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
O un empleador. Otros, pues, que tienen el asilo pendiente, que les puede continuar dando una protección. Pero muchas personas que no tienen ninguna otra forma de resolver su estatus migratorio —no tienen ninguna petición familiar, ninguna petición de empleador—, realmente lo que tienen que hacer es tratar de resolver su situación; si no lo pueden hacer, entonces pensar en la posibilidad de irse. Porque veo difícil que una persona se pueda quedar indocumentada en Estados Unidos, como estamos viendo las cosas: están aumentando los procesos de deportación rápida y estas deportaciones masivas que estamos viendo en esta administración.

Entonces, yo creo que sería demasiado tenso y presionante para una persona quedarse definitivamente sin estatus migratorio.

ORIAN BRITO:
Sí, sí. Y hay que estar pendiente, porque esta batalla es judicial. Aunque el juez pueda rechazar la apelación del gobierno, el gobierno va a buscar otros mecanismos para llevar esto adonde consiga lo que pretende, que es poner fin al programa.

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Correcto.

ORIAN BRITO:
Gracias. Bueno, Douglas Rodríguez, un gran abrazo. Dice: “Eres uno de los pocos que da información tal cual, sin falsas expectativas. Siempre veo tu programa y me parece excelente porque dices las cosas con claridad y sin adornos. Quien quiere escuchar la verdad sabe que aquí la consigue. No existe otro espacio igual.” Muchísimas gracias, Douglas, y un fuerte abrazo. Ese es el compromiso. Yo, insisto, abogada, yo no quería hacer de este espacio algo dedicado a la inmigración, porque hay tantos temas en el mundo: temas políticos, temas de interés, destinos que uno visita y conoce y quisiera compartir. Pero la vida y la gente me han llevado a este camino, y es el compromiso de seguir, ¿no? Para ayudarlos en la medida de lo posible.

Otra persona me pide que demos su nombre. Saludos desde Columbus, Ohio. Pudo renovar su licencia en el DMV de la zona norte. No le preguntaron nada; solo se presentó como si fuera a sacarse una cédula, con buena presencia, con buena actitud y una sonrisa. Con todo en la mano, la renovación se la dieron —escuchen— hasta 28 de marzo de 2026. Solo le pidieron la licencia que está por vencer, prueba de residencia; mostró su TPS 2021, su permiso de trabajo —este permiso de trabajo vencido en 2022— con el papel de recibido: ya está aprobado, solo tiene que esperar la carta de aprobación y los documentos. Este es por asilo. Todo fluyó bien, más de lo que pensaba. ¡Qué bueno, qué bueno! Porque tener la licencia —y sabía que ese era uno de los sitios donde más se registraban problemas—…

La pregunta es: ¿qué pasa si hay retrasos en la renovación de mi permiso de trabajo? —pregunta María Gómez.

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Sí, pero ¿el permiso de trabajo a través de TPS?

ORIAN BRITO:
De TPS, sí.

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Bueno, si hay retrasos porque la persona vaya a hacer una re-registración y su caso está en trámite, lo que habrá es que esperar el retraso. No creo que el gobierno vaya a apurarse a aprobar un permiso de trabajo cuando el mismo gobierno está pretendiendo terminar el TPS. Entonces, hacer esa re-registración y volver a pedir el permiso es como una protección, y tener ese recibo que muestra que la persona lo hizo. Pero, la verdad, no creo que esa petición de permiso de trabajo vaya a llegar muy rápido.

ORIAN BRITO:
OK. Liliana Torres: “Hoy fui a sacar la licencia —ayer, lunes— y no me la dieron porque dicen que no tienen autorización.” Es el verdadero drama. Hola, Orian: todavía no se ha publicado la decisión del juez Chen para registrarse en el TPS. ¿Debo esperar que se publique en inmigración esa decisión y si acatará la sentencia del juez Chen? ¿Cuándo podremos registrarnos o hago la registración de mi TPS 2023 sin esperar más?

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
El del 2023, no. Yo haría las re-registraciones del TPS 2021, que es el que vence mañana. El TPS del 2023 realmente está —vamos a decir— casi que muerto; pues todavía hay un litigio que continúa, pero no veo la posibilidad allí. Sí es cierto que el gobierno no ha publicado la decisión del juez Chen del viernes. Y no creo que la vaya a publicar tampoco. Yo no creo que el gobierno esté asumiendo la posición de publicar esto, y más que apelaron el sábado. Entonces, sí, es un reto porque la persona que vaya a pedir la re-registración puede que el mismo gobierno se la devuelva; puede que se la acepte y le emita el recibo. La verdad, todos estamos aquí —vamos a decir— inventando.

ORIAN BRITO:
Un día a la vez, a la buena de Dios.

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Exacto, a la buena de Dios. Esa es la palabra.

ORIAN BRITO:
Sí, es así, porque entonces usted va a intentar; si no viene, entonces no viene. Uno trata, pero esto es un sorteo. Esto es como cuando uno va a sacar la visa: uno llega a esa taquilla con buena actitud, con la mejor de las ganas, y puede ser que te reboten, que te digan que no, aunque tengas todos los documentos. Yo recuerdo que, antes de venir a este país, me la negaron dos veces. Abogada, eso para mí fue —la primera vez— un poco traumático porque, además, no pude hacer nada: estaba muy pequeño; mi mamá dijo que era madre soltera —no sé por qué dijo eso porque, aunque mi mamá estaba divorciada, yo tengo a mi papá y él se quedó—. Y la segunda vez, mi mamá había fallecido y, cuando llegué, me preguntaron —tenía 20 años, recuerdo— qué propiedad tenía. Y yo dije: “Bueno, ¿qué propiedad con 20 años podía tener?” Y me la negaron. Pero fue traumático, porque uno sale desmoralizado de ahí.

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Claro. Cualquier negatoria de un proceso migratorio afecta a las personas, sea una simple visa de turista o…

ORIAN BRITO:
Eso es horrible, horrible. Perfecto. Dos preguntas más para concluir. Alba Alcalá: “Del TPS 2021 salí del asilo de mi mamá por matrimonio con ciudadano. Permiso de trabajo por asilo. ¿Debo pedirlo por TPS? No he hecho ajuste todavía.”

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Uy, pero esas preguntas están como enredadas, porque lo que entendí es…

ORIAN BRITO:
Salió del asilo.

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
…salió del asilo porque se casó con ciudadano americano. Pero tiene TPS; vuelve y desisto. Pero, para que haya TPS, está casada con ciudadano americano…

ORIAN BRITO:
Ahora, si yo tuviese asilo y TPS, preferiría —en mi caso— pedir mi permiso de trabajo por el asilo más que por el TPS. Usted me corrige.

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Claro, claro, por el asilo, porque le va a dar más tiempo, y, pues, el asilo, en este momento, no tiene la persona la cita. En cambio, el TPS sí; ya vemos que lo están terminando.

ORIAN BRITO:
Perfecto. Otra persona dice: “Me registré, pero no he pedido el permiso de trabajo.” Bueno, tienes que pedirlo, porque lo peor es que no te lo den; pero hay que trabajar, a menos que no lo necesites, ¿no?

Bueno, abogada, me gustaría que quede su número de contacto. Gracias por dedicarnos estos minutos. Por supuesto, vamos a estar muy pendientes a la decisión, a la respuesta que pueda dar —por supuesto— el gobierno, para ampliarla a todos ustedes. Y me gustaría que cualquier persona que desee tener la asesoría de la abogada Martha Arias, que, además, tiene un espacio a las siete en América Radio 1260 AM, siempre lo utilizamos en los diversos espacios para la red de temas de inmigración… Me gusta que hoy me haya acompañado. ¿Dónde la pueden contactar?

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Sí, muchas gracias, Orian. Muchas gracias por invitarme. Efectivamente, los martes a las 7:00 p. m., en América Radio, tenemos el programa donde contestamos preguntas a los oyentes. Mi teléfono de oficina es el 305-671-0018. Pueden buscarme en mi página web ariasvilla.com.

ORIAN BRITO:
¿Cuántos años, abogada, tiene usted ejerciendo aquí en el sur de la Florida?

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Sí, como abogada de inmigración ejerciendo aquí, en el sur de la Florida, llevo 22 años, desde el 2003. Bastante tiempo. Exitosamente y con mucho orgullo he ejercido este derecho migratorio por 22 años. Me apasiona el tema, me encanta. Sí tengo que reconocer que este año ha sido uno de los años más retadores de la práctica migratoria, y en este sentido comparte la mayoría de los abogados de inmigración. Es muy difícil porque hay muchos cambios; hay unas políticas muy fuertes, agresivas, y, pues, esto hace que la práctica sea mucho más complicada y menos motivante, vamos a decir, pero, pues, tenemos que seguir en esa lucha.

ORIAN BRITO:
Además, hemos hecho un trabajo bonito porque los abogados, por un lado, explican, interpretan la ley, nos ponen al día de lo que está pasando; pero ya hemos hecho una relación entre abogados y periodistas donde drenamos, discutimos, nos reímos de las cosas de las que nos podemos reír, nos molestamos cuando hay que molestarse, pero vamos haciendo como una especie de soporte emocional, ¿no?

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Sí; o sea, en realidad es, precisamente, mostrar esa noticia diaria, mostrar esa política administrativa que, pues, lo más que uno puede es tratar de abogar porque se haga validez a la ley y a la Constitución, a los principios del derecho; pero, pues, tampoco nosotros los abogados podemos más que hacer eso. Obviamente, las políticas administrativas las establece cada nuevo presidente. Y estamos viendo que, aunque la ley no ha cambiado mucho, las políticas administrativas sí; y tenemos una cantidad de nuevas políticas administrativas en adición a una, pues, que es la más impactante en este momento, que es uno de los procesos de desnaturalización —es decir, tratar de quitarle la ciudadanía a las personas que adquirieron en algún momento su residencia o la ciudadanía misma con fraude, con mentiras—.

Entonces, estamos en un proceso de cambios muy constantes y, aparte de los cambios constantes, una política migratoria muy estricta. Por ejemplo, personas que tenían una orden de deportación y podían reabrir sus casos: uno les presentaba una petición familiar si estaban casados con ciudadano americano —por ejemplo—, o un hijo ciudadano americano, adulto, que los pedía; uno presentaba la petición y rara vez les daban una cita. Ahora les están dando cita y los están deteniendo en esa cita si tienen orden de deportación. Quiere decir que le importa la posibilidad de hacer una reapertura para esa persona para poder ajustar su estatus. Y importa muchos otros beneficios, como esos perdones que uno presentaba —la persona estando aquí— para poder ir fuera de los Estados Unidos a recibir la residencia. Si esa persona tiene una orden final, pues uno ya no va a querer presentar esa I‑130 o esa petición, porque hay una gran probabilidad de que los detengan, los arresten, al entrevistarlos.

Entonces, estos son esos cambios y esto es lo que está pasando en este momento.

ORIAN BRITO:
Gracias, abogada, por agregar esta realidad que se está viviendo, y es importante, por eso, que usted se asesore bien antes de asistir a alguna cita o someter alguna planilla. Eso es fundamental. Una asesoría en este momento puede hacer la diferencia en medio de estos cambios que se están viviendo —como lo describe la abogada Martha Arias—. Usted ya tiene aquí información precisa; hemos respondido a algunas de sus preguntas, las recurrentes. Le invito a que comparta esta información con algún familiar o conocido que esté en esta situación y, por supuesto, mañana nos volvemos a conectar con otra cosa que pueda ocurrir en el tema migratorio aquí en Estados Unidos.

Gracias, abogada, y muy buenas tardes —o buenas noches ya para todos—.

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Gracias, Orian. Felicidades para todos. Hasta la próxima.

ORIAN BRITO:
Hasta la próxima.

English Translation

ORIAN BRITO:
Friends, September 9. More than half a million Venezuelans with TPS in the United States are awaiting Judge Edward Chen’s decision regarding the appeal filed by the Department of Homeland Security, which seeks to end this immigration benefit. The uncertainty is great. The questions are many. You leave them for me on this social network—not only about driver’s licenses, but also about what will happen with the work permit. That is one of the questions I read.

That is why, in this space, we are going to talk with the immigration attorney from South Florida, Martha Arias, who is going to help us answer some doubts about what could happen with this program, what the legal scenarios are, and what this process means for Venezuelans protected under this status. As always, I invite you to stay, to leave your questions, and I thank you for subscribing and being part of this community.

Attorney, good afternoon. The government did not take long to appeal: on Friday we celebrated Judge Chen’s decision, and on Saturday it appealed. We are waiting to see what might be decided. The government’s appeal asks the judge to, sort of, dismiss his own decision—something I see as almost impossible, right? How do you see it?

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
I see it as unlikely, but not impossible either, because, look, the appeal is being made in the Ninth Circuit, which is the circuit that corresponds to California. The Ninth Circuit is known for being more Democratic or, as people call it, liberal. So we know that Judge Chen has a more Democratic tendency. Therefore, I do not see it as impossible that the judge’s decision will be maintained. But still, the government is pressing hard because the government’s intention is to end TPS.

ORIAN BRITO:
End it, end it…?

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Yes. The same thing that happened with TPS in 2023 was something similar: that TPS was ended; then the judge said no; it was appealed; that judge’s decision was maintained; and the government later went to the Supreme Court. And the Supreme Court was the one that finally said: “Yes, the government can end it.” In other words, it was not the Ninth Circuit, the court of appeals, that gave the final decision to end TPS; it was the Supreme Court itself. So, the same thing could happen here.

ORIAN BRITO:
When we say the same thing could happen, it means that, regardless of the judge having made a decision in favor, the government could—and this question has already been asked to me this week—resort to that path to the Supreme Court to say: “Well, if I granted this, don’t I have the right to take it away?”

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
No, but what happens is that it is not, technically, that he has the right to take it away, because remember that what he issued was a preliminary injunction, which said: “I will not allow it to end while the litigation continues.” So what is being appealed is that injunction. That is the part that could go up to the Supreme Court.

ORIAN BRITO:
Meanwhile, there is a group of people who remain in limbo. There are two evident situations, judging by the comments I receive. One has to do with work permits. Some of these work permits have an expiration date as soon as tomorrow, September 10. Some people tell me, “I already submitted an extension.” Others tell me, “I have doubts whether this is automatically extended, even though the date says it expires tomorrow.” Where do we stand, and what can be said to those people who have the uncertainty and, of course, the fear of losing their jobs?

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Of course. Well, it is not easy; it is complicated, but let’s see: when the Department of Homeland Security ended TPS from 2021—which expires tomorrow—upon ending it, they granted an automatic extension, let’s say, like a 60-day grace period. This means that until November 10, 2025, those Venezuelans whose TPS says it expires tomorrow, September 10, would have that automatic extension until November 10. That means their work permit also continues to be valid until that date, even if the card says it expired on September 10. It is an automatic extension.

The person can print the information about that extension from the immigration website to present it to their employer, if the employer asks for that proof or does not know the immigration status or the validity of that work authorization.

Now, I am also recommending that people re-register for TPS starting tomorrow, within this 60-day period. Why? Because we do not know how the litigation will continue, and—let’s say—they get lucky that at some point during this litigation TPS is extended again; then, the person will be protected by that re-registration already done.

So, the situation is: the validity would be until November 10 of this year, unless something, in any of these courts, authorizes once again that TPS continue.

ORIAN BRITO:
Well, re-register and understand that this extension could be, for now, for those from TPS 2021, valid for 60 days. Now, the big uncertainty is what could happen after, because the days go by.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
The uncertainty is what could happen after. If there is, suddenly, some lawsuit or something that allows these Venezuelans to continue with TPS, then we will see what will happen. For now, we continue with the back-and-forth of things. Every day it is something different: there is a decision that ends it; then an appeal says no; and that is where we are. But for now, today as we speak, September 9, this TPS is extended; it remains extended.

That is, the government appealed on Saturday; that appeal decision will not come out yet. So today we have in force Judge Chen’s decision from Friday, which said that TPS should continue.

ORIAN BRITO:
OK. Although, in the system, the comments are varied. There are people who have been able to register but are not given a receipt. Others do have it. There are people who cannot get a driver’s license; it has been a whole issue…

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
As for licenses: they should allow them to get a license because the same bulletin, or the same document, says it has 60 days of validity.

ORIAN BRITO:
In fact, the Miami-Dade tax collector himself sent us a statement saying that for those people with that TPS, plus the work permit, those were the documents that allowed people to obtain the license, and they were going to accept them until November 7 of this year. For how long they will extend it, or for how long they will issue the license, is not clear to me.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
I imagine that if they go before, they will issue it up to the 60 days, up to the expiration of those 60 days, which in this case would be November 10, 2025. They cannot issue the license for longer, because that is how long they will have status.

ORIAN BRITO:
Of course. Well, I want to read some of the comments because—attorney—I am happy; I have been trying to reach you for several days. You are very busy, and today you can join us. I always like it because—as I say—there are many people who, in the midst of nervousness, get irritated. Sometimes the attorney does not say what people want to hear, but I think that, at this moment, preparation and listening, especially to what you do not want to hear, is what can shed the true light on the path to follow, so that you can find a way and stabilize yourself in the country.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Exactly. The problem is that there are people who do have a way to resolve their immigration status because they have a U.S. citizen or resident spouse, or they have a family petition from a parent or a sibling.

ORIAN BRITO:
Or an employer.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Or an employer. Others have asylum pending, which can continue providing protection. But many people who have no other way to resolve their immigration status—no family petition, no employer petition—really what they have to do is try to resolve their situation; if they cannot, then think about the possibility of leaving. Because I find it difficult for someone to remain undocumented in the United States, as we are seeing things: the processes of expedited removal are increasing and these mass deportations we are seeing in this administration.

So I think it would be too tense and stressful for a person to remain definitively without immigration status.

ORIAN BRITO:
Yes, yes. And you have to be attentive because this battle is judicial. Even if the judge can reject the government’s appeal, the government will look for other mechanisms to take this to where it gets what it intends, which is to end the program.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Correct.

ORIAN BRITO:
Thank you. Well, Douglas Rodríguez, a big hug. He says: “You are one of the few who gives information as it is, without false expectations. I always watch your program, and I think it is excellent because you say things clearly and without embellishment. Whoever wants to hear the truth knows they can find it here. There is no other space like it.” Thank you very much, Douglas, and a big hug. That is the commitment. I insist, attorney, I did not want to make this space something dedicated to immigration because there are so many topics in the world—political topics, topics of interest, destinations one visits and knows and would like to share. But life and people have led me down this path, and it is the commitment to continue, right? To help you as much as possible.

Another person asks me to give their name. Greetings from Columbus, Ohio. They were able to renew their license at the DMV in the north area. They were not asked anything; they just showed up as if to get an ID card—with good presence, good attitude, and a smile. With everything in hand, the renewal was granted—listen—until March 28, 2026. They were only asked for the license that was about to expire, proof of residence; they showed their TPS 2021, their work permit—this work permit expired in 2022—with the receipt; it is already approved; they just have to wait for the approval notice and the documents. This one is through asylum. Everything flowed well—better than expected. How good, how good, because having the license, and I knew that this was one of the places where more problems were reported…

The question is: “What happens if there are delays in the renewal of my work permit?” asks María Gómez.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Yes, but the work permit through TPS?

ORIAN BRITO:
Through TPS, yes.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Well, if there are delays because the person is going to do a re-registration and it will be processed, what they will have to do is wait; there will be delay. I do not think the government is going to hurry to approve a work permit when the same government is intending to end TPS. So doing that re-registration and requesting the work permit again is like a protection, and having that receipt that shows the person did it. But honestly, I do not think that work permit request will be approved very quickly.

ORIAN BRITO:
OK. Liliana Torres: “Today I went to get the license—yesterday, Monday—and they did not give it to me because they say they do not have authorization.” That is the real drama. Hello, Orian: the judge Chen’s decision has not yet been published to register for TPS. Should I wait for that decision to be published on immigration and whether they will comply with Judge Chen’s ruling? When will we be able to register, or do I do my TPS 2023 registration without waiting any longer?

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Not the one from 2023. I would do the re-registrations of TPS 2021, which is the one that expires tomorrow. TPS 2023 is really, let’s say, almost dead; there is still litigation that continues, but I do not see the possibility there. It is true that the government has not published Judge Chen’s decision from Friday. And I do not think they are going to publish it either. I do not think the government is taking the position to publish this, especially since they appealed on Saturday. So yes, it is a challenge because the person who goes to request the re-registration may have it returned by the government; or they may accept it and issue the receipt. Honestly, we are all here, let’s say, figuring it out.

ORIAN BRITO:
One day at a time, God willing.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Exactly—God willing. That is the word.

ORIAN BRITO:
Yes, that is how it is, because then you will try; if it does not come, then it does not come. One tries, but this is a lottery. It is like when one goes to get a visa: you arrive at the window with a good attitude, with the best disposition, and you may be rejected, told no, even if you have all the documents. I remember that, before coming to this country, I was denied twice. Attorney, that was— the first time— a bit traumatic for me because, in addition, I could not do anything: I was very young; my mother said that she was a single mother—I do not know why she said that because, although my mother was divorced, I have my father and he stayed. And the second time, my mother had passed away and, when I arrived, they asked me— I was 20 years old, I remember— what property I had. And I said, “Well, what property could I have at 20 years old?” And they denied me. But it was traumatic, because one leaves there demoralized.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Of course. Any denial of an immigration process affects people—be it a simple tourist visa or…

ORIAN BRITO:
It is horrible, horrible. Perfect. Two more questions to conclude. Alba Alcalá: “From TPS 2021 I left my mother’s asylum due to marriage to a citizen. Work permit through asylum. Should I request it through TPS? I have not done adjustment yet.”

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Wow, but those questions are a bit tangled, because what I understood is…

ORIAN BRITO:
She left asylum.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
…she left asylum because she married a U.S. citizen. But she has TPS; I go back and desist. But for there to be TPS, she is married to a U.S. citizen…

ORIAN BRITO:
Now, if I had asylum and TPS, I would prefer—in my case— to request my work permit through asylum rather than through TPS. You correct me.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Of course, of course—through asylum—because it will give more time, and, well, with asylum, at this moment, the person does not have the interview scheduled. In contrast, TPS—as we can see— they are ending it.

ORIAN BRITO:
Perfect. Another person says: “I registered but I have not requested the work permit.” Well, you have to request it, because the worst thing is that they do not grant it; but you need to work, unless you do not need it, right?

Well, attorney, I would like your contact number to remain on record. Thank you for giving us these minutes. Of course, we are going to be very attentive to the decision, to the response that the government may give, to share it with all of you. And I would like that any person who wishes to have the advice of attorney Martha Arias, who also has a segment at seven on América Radio 1260 AM, which we always use in various spaces for the network on immigration topics… I am glad you joined me today. Where can they contact you?

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Yes, thank you very much, Orian. Thank you very much for inviting me. Indeed, on Tuesdays at 7:00 p.m., on América Radio, we have the program where we answer listeners’ questions. My office phone number is 305-671-0018. You can find me on my website ariasvilla.com.

ORIAN BRITO:
How many years, attorney, have you been practicing here in South Florida?

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Yes—as an immigration attorney practicing here in South Florida— I have been practicing for 22 years, since 2003. Quite a long time. I have practiced this field of immigration law successfully and with great pride for 22 years. I am passionate about the topic; I love it. I do have to acknowledge that this year has been one of the most challenging years in immigration practice, and most immigration attorneys share this sentiment. It is very difficult because there are many changes; there are very strong, aggressive policies, and this makes practice much more complicated and less motivating, so to speak; but we have to keep fighting.

ORIAN BRITO:
Moreover, we have done a nice job because attorneys, on the one hand, explain—interpret the law—and keep us up to date on what is happening; and we have already formed a relationship between attorneys and journalists where we vent, discuss, laugh about the things we can laugh about, get upset when we have to, but we are building a sort of emotional support.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Yes; that is, in reality, it is precisely to show that daily news, to show that administrative policy; the most we can do is try to advocate for upholding the law and the Constitution, the principles of law; but, well, we attorneys cannot do more than that. Obviously, administrative policies are established by each new president. And we are seeing that, although the law has not changed much, the administrative policies have; and we have a number of new administrative policies in addition to one that is the most impactful at this moment, which is one of the processes of denaturalization—that is, trying to take away citizenship from people who, at some point, obtained their residence or citizenship itself through fraud, through lies.

So, we are in a process of very constant changes and, apart from the constant changes, a very strict immigration policy. For example, people who had an order of removal and could reopen their cases: one used to file a family petition if they were married to a U.S. citizen— for example— or if an adult U.S. citizen child was petitioning for them; one would file the petition and rarely would they get an interview. Now they are being given interviews and they are being detained at that interview if they have an order of removal. That means it affects the possibility of getting a reopening for that person to be able to adjust status. And it affects many other benefits, such as those waivers that one used to file—while the person was here—to be able to go outside the United States to receive the residency. If that person has a final order, then one will no longer want to file that I‑130 or that petition, because there is a high probability that they will be detained or arrested when interviewed.

So, these are the changes, and this is what is happening at this moment.

ORIAN BRITO:
Thank you, attorney, for adding this reality that is being experienced; and that is why it is important that you seek proper legal advice before attending any interview or filing any form. That is essential. Legal advice at this moment can make the difference amid these changes that are being experienced— as attorney Martha Arias describes it. You already have precise information here; we have answered some of your questions, the recurring ones. I invite you to share this information with any family member or acquaintance who is in this situation, and, of course, tomorrow we will reconnect with something else that may occur in immigration matters here in the United States.

Thank you, attorney, and good afternoon—or good evening now to everyone.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Thank you, Orian. Best wishes to everyone. Until next time.

ORIAN BRITO:
Until next time.

The post Venezuelan TPS: After the Government’s Appeal appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..

]]> https://ariasvilla.com/venezuelan-tps-after-the-governments-appeal/feed/ 0 The Latest Supreme Court Decision on TPS for Venezuelans https://ariasvilla.com/the-latest-supreme-court-decision-on-tps-for-venezuelans/ https://ariasvilla.com/the-latest-supreme-court-decision-on-tps-for-venezuelans/#respond Mon, 19 May 2025 21:49:14 +0000 https://ariasvilla.com/?p=11561 The post The Latest Supreme Court Decision on TPS for Venezuelans appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..

]]>

The U.S. Supreme Court granted the Trump administration the discretion to end the Temporary Protected Status (TPS) designation granted to Venezuelans in 2023. This decision has left many in the Venezuelan community understandably concerned about their future in the United States.

The legal process has been complex, with the Federal Court of California initially blocking the termination, but now the Supreme Court has allowed the government to proceed. This means the 2023 TPS designation could soon be officially ended, although ongoing litigation in the federal courts might continue for some time.

For those covered under the 2021 TPS designation, there remains hope as the federal government has yet to make a final decision on extending that protection, with an expected ruling around mid-July.

My recommendation to everyone affected is to stay calm and informed. Legal measures and legislative efforts are underway, including a bipartisan bill known as TPS 2025, which aims to provide renewed protections for Venezuelans. Keeping hope alive is important, but also consulting with a qualified immigration attorney to explore all available legal options is essential.

Follow me on Social Media

SPANISH TRANSCRIPT:

Jessica Morales:
Saludos amigos de TVV Network, hacemos este avance para informarles que la Corte Suprema de los Estados Unidos ha aprobado la petición de la Administración Trump de anular la extensión del estatus de protección temporal que ampara a más de 300,000 venezolanos en Estados Unidos y, de acuerdo con información publicada por NBC News, el Tribunal Superior ha concedido una solicitud de emergencia presentada por la Administración Trump, lo que significa que los funcionarios pueden avanzar para revertir una decisión tomada al final de la administración Biden para extender esta protección, como ya decíamos, a más de 300,000 venezolanos que están amparados con este estatus de protección temporal.
Martha Arias, abogada de inmigración, nos acompaña en esta oportunidad. Martha, gracias por estar con nosotros y quisiéramos conocer luego de esta decisión de la Corte Suprema cómo quedan estas personas que están amparadas por el TPS de la designación de 2023.

Attorney Martha Arias:
Sí, muchísimas gracias, Jessica, un saludo para usted y toda su audiencia.
Efectivamente, todo esto es un poquito confuso para las personas. Como usted bien dijo, este es el TPS del 2023, y la Corte Suprema le ha concedido al Ejecutivo, es decir, en este caso, al presidente, la facultad de terminar este TPS por discreción.
Eso quiere decir que la decisión de la directora del Departamento de Seguridad Nacional, que emitió una decisión en enero de este año terminando el TPS del 2023, pudiera entonces ya estar en firme.
Para recordarle, la Corte Federal de California dijo que el Ejecutivo no podía terminar el TPS y el presidente apeló esa decisión ante la Corte Suprema en forma de emergencia.
Ahora la Corte Suprema está diciendo si el Ejecutivo tiene esa discreción. Quiere decir que posiblemente veremos que el litigio continúe en la Corte Federal de California, Jessica, pero lo más probable es que el juez entonces va a tener que o hacer otro análisis o aceptar esa decisión de la directora del Departamento de Seguridad Nacional.

Jessica Morales:
Pero esto es una decisión que puede apelarse.

Attorney Martha Arias:
Claro, se puede apelar porque igual lo que hubo acá fue en inmigración, en inmigración o en leyes hay unas cosas que se llaman actos interlocutorios que son cuando uno puede apelar un pequeño tema dentro del tema grande que existe, un pequeño tema que es muy importante, es crucial, pero vamos a decir eso, una partecita nomás de todo el tema legal grande. Entonces aquí esto es como un acto interlocutorio, como un pedacito que se apeló.
Ahora, esto regresa, el juez puede de todos modos decir, bueno, el gobierno puede hacerlo, pero no lo hizo bien, o violó esta ley, o violó la otra, el juez de todos modos, federal de California puede tomar una decisión final distinta, y en ese caso, las personas podrían apelar a la corte que sigue.
No creo que vaya a pasar aquí sinceramente, pero bueno, vamos a esperar a ver cuál va a ser el movimiento que van a hacer las partes demandantes.

Jessica Morales:
Y mientras tanto, ¿cuál es la situación o la condición de estos más de 300,000 venezolanos que están amparados por esta designación del TPS?

Attorney Martha Arias:
Bueno, eso sí lo veo problemático porque fíjese que el juez había tomado una medida cautelar diciendo que no se podía aplicar esa decisión del Departamento de Seguridad Nacional de acabar o determinar el TPS.
¿Qué quiere decir? Que al regresar esa decisión no va a quedar en pie. Quiere decir que va a continuar seguramente el gobierno pudiendo considerar que esos TPS del 2023 no son válidos, quedaron terminados. Porque ya no va a haber otra medida cautelar que se pueda presentar porque esa fue la medida cautelar que se presentó, fue la decisión del jueves y eso lo que la Corte Suprema está diciendo, que el Ejecutivo sí lo puede determinar. Entonces, posiblemente no haya otra medida cautelar, lo que quiere decir es que si quedan firmes los TPS del 2023, pues quedarían terminados y pues de ahí en adelante pueden empezar a incurrir en un estatus de ilegalidad o sin un estatus legal, en este caso no TPS.

Jessica Morales:
¿Qué ocurre, Martha, con quienes están amparados por la designación del TPS de 2021?

Attorney Martha Arias:
Esas personas todavía tienen una esperanza porque el juez federal dijo que el gobierno federal iba a dar una decisión más o menos para el catorce de julio para saber si extendía o no el TPS del 2021, que el TPS del 2021 todavía hay posibilidad de ser extendido. No sabemos qué va a decir el gobierno en este caso. O sea que el del 2021 todavía está en suspenso.

Jessica Morales:
Ahora Martha, quisiéramos, como profesional de las leyes de inmigración, que comparta una recomendación con estas personas, con estos venezolanos que tienen estatus de protección temporal y que hoy reciben esta noticia de la Corte Suprema.

Attorney Martha Arias:
Bueno, yo les aconsejaría a todos, primero, pues que mantengan la calma siempre, hay medidas legales y ejecutivas que se pueden tomar. De hecho, no sé si ustedes escucharon que hay un proyecto de ley bipartidista que se presentó por la representante republicana María Elvira Salazar y las dos demócratas Soto y David Wasserman. Ellas tres presentaron un proyecto de ley que se llama TPS 2025, que le daría protección a las personas de Venezuela y nuevamente sería como un nuevo TPS. Esto pues pienso yo que debemos tener fe, porque puede ser una buena solución para aquellos que tienen ese TPS del 2023 que quedaría terminado. Yo pienso que deben guardar esa esperanza. También, el otro consejo es que consulten un abogado de inmigración para ver qué otras opciones legales.

ENGLISH TRANSCRIPT:

Jessica Morales:
Greetings friends of TVV Network, we bring this update to inform you that the Supreme Court of the United States has approved the petition from the Trump Administration to annul the extension of the Temporary Protected Status (TPS) that protects more than 300,000 Venezuelans in the United States and according to information published by NBC News, the Supreme Court has granted an emergency request filed by the Trump Administration, which means that officials can proceed to reverse a decision made at the end of the Biden administration to extend this protection, as we said, to more than 300,000 Venezuelans who are protected with this Temporary Protected Status.
Martha Arias, immigration attorney, joins us this time. Martha, thank you for being with us and we would like to know, after this Supreme Court decision, how are the people protected by the TPS designation of 2023 affected?

Attorney Martha Arias:
Yes, thank you very much, Jessica, greetings to you and your entire audience.
Indeed, all this is a bit confusing for people. As you said, this is the TPS of 2023, and the Supreme Court has granted the Executive, that is, in this case, the President, the authority to end this TPS at his discretion.
That means the decision of the Director of the Department of Homeland Security, who issued a decision in January of this year terminating the TPS of 2023, could now be final.
To remind you, the Federal Court of California said the Executive could not end the TPS and the President appealed that decision to the Supreme Court as an emergency.
Now the Supreme Court is deciding if the Executive has that discretion. This means we will possibly see the litigation continue in the Federal Court of California, Jessica, but most likely the judge will have to either do another analysis or accept that decision by the Director of the Department of Homeland Security.

Jessica Morales:
But this is a decision that can be appealed.

Attorney Martha Arias:
Of course, it can be appealed because what happened here was in immigration, in immigration or in laws there are things called interlocutory acts, which are when one can appeal a small issue within the bigger issue that exists, a small issue that is very important, crucial, but let’s say it’s just a small part of the whole big legal issue. So this is like an interlocutory act, like a little piece that was appealed.
Now, it returns, the judge can still say, well, the government can do it, but they didn’t do it right, or violated this law, or violated that one, the federal judge in California can still make a different final decision, and in that case, the plaintiffs could appeal to the next court.
I don’t think that will happen here honestly, but well, let’s wait to see what the plaintiffs will do.

Jessica Morales:
Meanwhile, what is the situation or condition of these more than 300,000 Venezuelans protected by this TPS designation?

Attorney Martha Arias:
Well, I see that as problematic because notice that the judge had taken a preliminary injunction saying that the Department of Homeland Security’s decision to end or determine the TPS could not be applied.
What does that mean? That when that decision returns it will not stand. It means the government will likely continue to consider that those TPS from 2023 are not valid, that they ended. Because there will be no other preliminary injunction that can be filed because that was the injunction that was filed, it was Thursday’s decision and that is what the Supreme Court is saying, that the Executive can determine it. So possibly there will be no other preliminary injunction, which means if the 2023 TPS remains final, they would be terminated and from then on people could begin to be in an illegal status or without a legal status, in this case, not TPS.

Jessica Morales:
What happens, Martha, with those protected by the TPS designation of 2021?

Attorney Martha Arias:
Those people still have hope because the federal judge said the federal government was going to give a decision roughly by July 14 to know if it would extend the TPS of 2021 or not, that the TPS of 2021 still has the possibility to be extended. We do not know what the government will say in this case. So the 2021 TPS is still in suspense.

Jessica Morales:
Now Martha, as a professional in immigration law, we would like you to share a recommendation with these people, with these Venezuelans who have temporary protected status and who today receive this news from the Supreme Court.

Attorney Martha Arias:
Well, I would advise everyone, first, to always stay calm, there are legal and executive measures that can be taken. In fact, I don’t know if you have heard that there is a bipartisan bill introduced by Republican Representative María Elvira Salazar and two Democrats Soto and David Wasserman. The three of them introduced a bill called TPS 2025, which would give protection to Venezuelan people and it would again be like a new TPS. I think we must have faith because it can be a good solution for those who have that TPS from 2023 that would be terminated. I think they should keep that hope. Also, my other advice is that they consult an immigration attorney to see what other legal options they have.

The post The Latest Supreme Court Decision on TPS for Venezuelans appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..

]]> https://ariasvilla.com/the-latest-supreme-court-decision-on-tps-for-venezuelans/feed/ 0 What You Need to Know About the New Bipartisan TPS Bill for Venezuelans https://ariasvilla.com/what-you-need-to-know-about-the-new-bipartisan-tps-bill-for-venezuelans/ https://ariasvilla.com/what-you-need-to-know-about-the-new-bipartisan-tps-bill-for-venezuelans/#respond Sat, 17 May 2025 14:43:05 +0000 https://ariasvilla.com/?p=11554 The post What You Need to Know About the New Bipartisan TPS Bill for Venezuelans appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..

]]>

Last week, I had the opportunity to speak with Raffa Mejías on EVTV’s program “Dígalo Aquí” about an important development in immigration policy: a new bipartisan bill introduced in Congress that would extend Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Venezuelans into 2025.

This proposal, co-sponsored by Republican María Elvira Salazar and supported by Florida Democrats, aims to secure legal protection for all Venezuelans present in the U.S. at the time of the bill’s approval. Unlike previous extensions, this new TPS legislation could benefit even those who arrived in 2024—expanding protections more broadly than before.

I explained during the interview that this bill could offer both political and legal benefits. Politically, if passed by a Republican-led Congress, it could provide the administration with leverage to show strength while delivering humanitarian support. Legally, the bill would make ongoing litigation over the previous termination of TPS moot—resolving current legal uncertainties and clearing the way for a clean and stable program.

But time is of the essence. The current TPS designation for Venezuelans expires in September 2025. For this new law to take effect and avoid delays in legal challenges, it must be passed quickly.

FOLLOW ME FOR MORE NEWS UPDATES

SPANISH TRANSCRIPT:

Raffa Mejías:
Hoy la congresista por el estado de Florida, María Elvira Salazar, a través de sus redes sociales hace este anuncio donde dice que está copatrocinando este TPS 2025.

Abogada Martha Arias:
Sí, a ver, muchísimas gracias, mira. Yo pienso que puede ser posible que el Congreso actúe a través de esta ley, es decir, que la apruebe, puede ser posible. Y me parece que sería un buen movimiento, una buena jugada de la administración. Porque, a mi pensar, la administración del presidente Trump quiere deportar al mayor número de personas y quiere mostrar fuerza o ser estricto con la inmigración. Y si este TPS lo pasa al Congreso, del cual la mayoría republicana sabemos tiene casi todo el Congreso, entonces sería un punto favorable para el presidente. Porque en vez de decir: “fui yo el que lo aprobé”, es el mismo Congreso el que lo aprueba. Entonces, eso sería un beneficio grande para el Ejecutivo y, igualmente, sería un gran beneficio para los venezolanos.

Raffa Mejías:
Abogada, el hecho de ser una ley bipartidista le da mayor oportunidad de ser aprobada. ¿Podría pasar en el primer comité? ¿Qué se podría valorar en este momento?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Yo pienso que sí. Obviamente, el ser bipartidista ayuda muchísimo. El hecho de que haya allí una republicana apoyándolo, como María Elvira, y dos demócratas de la Florida, ayuda muchísimo. Yo pienso que eso es un punto a favor. Y también el hecho de que es un tema que todos estamos… incluso muchos republicanos están a favor del TPS de Venezuela. Ahora, esto sería como un proyecto bipartidista, como que dejaría a la administración de Biden a un lado, cosa que la administración no quiere. Entonces, pienso… a mí lo único que me preocupa es, de pronto, la demora. Porque acuérdese que el TPS, todo proyecto de ley en el Congreso, usualmente toma tiempo. Ahora, si de pronto lo aprueban de una forma rápida, pues eso sería un beneficio. Tiene que ser antes de septiembre, ojalá, que es cuando terminaría el TPS de los venezolanos este año.

Raffa Mejías:
Abogada, tomando en cuenta el primer TPS para los venezolanos en 2021, posteriormente la extensión en 2023, y ahora este de 2025, ¿cuáles serían las diferencias a valorar?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Bueno, ahí yo pienso que va a haber una confusión grande. Este proyecto dice que aplicarían todos los venezolanos que estén presentes en los Estados Unidos al momento de la aprobación. Quiere decir que va a cobijar a bastantes personas. No solamente los del 2021, los del 2023, incluso los que hayan llegado el año pasado, 2024, hasta el momento de la aprobación. Eso es una ventaja. Pero mi preocupación con la confusión legal es que todos sabemos que el presidente Trump, a través del Departamento de Homeland Security, terminó el TPS, sobre todo este del 2023. Y hay un litigio en el cual se dio una medida cautelar diciendo que no aplica esa terminación del TPS por parte de la administración actual. Es decir, el TPS queda, por ahora, extendido hasta el año entrante, octubre de 2026. Con la entrada de esta ley, yo pienso que se resolvería ese problema legal, de hecho. Porque entonces ese litigio va a ser lo que se llama “moot.” “Moot” quiere decir que ya no tenemos por qué pelear, o sea, esto ya se resolvió por el Congreso. Esas demandas todas se caerían porque ya no hay ningún litigio que resolver. Entonces, eso sería el beneficio legal. Pero entonces tendrían que hacerlo rápido también para evitar perder tiempo con todas estas demandas que están cursando en muchas partes federales del país.

Raffa Mejías:
Today, the congresswoman for the state of Florida, María Elvira Salazar, through her social media, makes this announcement where she says she is co-sponsoring this TPS 2025.

Attorney Martha Arias:
Yes, thank you very much. Look, I think it is possible that Congress acts through this law, that is, that it approves it—it could be possible. And it seems to me that it would be a good move, a good play by the administration. Because, in my opinion, the administration of President Trump wants to deport the largest number of people and wants to show strength or be strict on immigration. And if this TPS is passed to Congress—which we know is mostly Republican—it would be favorable for the president. Because instead of saying, “I was the one who approved it,” it’s the Congress itself that would approve it. So, that would be a big benefit for the Executive and also a great benefit for Venezuelans.

Raffa Mejías:
Attorney, the fact that it is a bipartisan law gives it more chances of being approved. Could it pass in the first committee? What could be evaluated at this moment?

Attorney Martha Arias:
I think so. Obviously, being bipartisan helps a lot. The fact that there is a Republican supporting it, like María Elvira, and two Democrats from Florida helps a lot. I think that’s a point in its favor. Also, the fact that it’s an issue that everyone is… even many Republicans are in favor of TPS for Venezuela. Now, this would be a bipartisan project, like leaving the Biden administration aside, which is something the administration doesn’t want. So I think… the only thing that worries me is maybe the delay. Because remember that TPS, every bill in Congress, usually takes time. Now, if they approve it quickly, well, that would be the benefit. It has to be before September, hopefully, which is when the current TPS for Venezuelans ends this year.

Raffa Mejías:
Attorney, taking into account the first TPS for Venezuelans in 2021, then the extension in 2023, and now this 2025 one, what would be the differences to consider?

Attorney Martha Arias:
Well, there I think there’s going to be a big confusion. This project says that it would apply to all Venezuelans who are present in the United States at the time of approval. That means it’s going to cover a lot of people. Not only those from 2021, 2023—even those who arrived last year, 2024, up to the moment of approval. That’s an advantage. But my concern with the legal confusion is that we all know that President Trump, through the Department of Homeland Security, ended TPS—especially the 2023 one. And there is litigation where a preliminary injunction was granted saying that that termination of TPS by the current administration does not apply. That is, TPS remains, for now, extended until next year, October 2026. With the entry of this law, I think that legal or de facto problem would be resolved. Because then that litigation would become what is called “moot.” Moot means we no longer have to fight. That is, this is already resolved by Congress. All those lawsuits would fall away because there is no litigation left to resolve. So that would be the legal benefit. But then they would have to do it quickly too, to avoid wasting time with all these lawsuits ongoing in many federal districts across the country.

The post What You Need to Know About the New Bipartisan TPS Bill for Venezuelans appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..

]]> https://ariasvilla.com/what-you-need-to-know-about-the-new-bipartisan-tps-bill-for-venezuelans/feed/ 0